Dancer Archive
Thread: GCW Vote
Page 1 of 2
akothas
Fri Nov 26, 2004 12:01 am
#1
I know you guys are wanting/needing more content, so go make your vote count in the GCW top 10 issues if you choose to. Take a look at option #5. You only get one vote, so make your voices heard.
Later
Valarena
Fri Nov 26, 2004 4:11 am
#2
GCW main issue: People shoot at us (we are dancers, we are THE uber FTOM)
Oqua
Fri Nov 26, 2004 9:43 am
#3
Hmmm...
Sorry but I just have to comment on this one. No disrespect Phrixus because I know you are posting this in an attempt to be helpful, but there really isn't anything for us to votefor in that list (pertaining to entertainer content).
I know this is good ol' Bootstraps idea of helping...for that I suppose we are all at least a little happy he is making some attempt. You need to let him know though he needs to change his way of thinking.
Entertainers are already in the GCW....we get to be factioned as well as being able to go overt. *small wry smile* Before anyone really sensitive from H4KD gets upset that I am attacking their boy, nope nope...think again. This is not a flame. I am merely trying to point out a fact, and that really isn't content for us, because although some of us think we shouldn't be in this game, we already are.
The title of the link:
Vote for your favorite idea/concept
Number 5 (i.e. our entertainer content to vote on):
Entertainers in the GCW
Again, no offense Phrixus, but we should already be accounted for in the GCW without us having to vote that there are actually live people who play entertainers and like to be counted/included/have a playable game with our class. It really isn't like a novel side thing such as factionable bases, battlefields, fighter bases, mission terminals, faction armor,or something else listed there.
Valarena
Fri Nov 26, 2004 9:59 am
#4
we could get a modifier if dancing so the opponents would get less accuracy because they would watch us 
can't see much more sadly (maybe fix the bonus if buffing overt in a factional base)
can't see much more sadly (maybe fix the bonus if buffing overt in a factional base)
akothas
Fri Nov 26, 2004 10:13 am
#5
Oqua wrote:
Hmmm...
Sorry but I just have to comment on this one. No disrespect Phrixus because I know you are posting this in an attempt to be helpful, but there really isn't anything for us to votefor in that list (pertaining to entertainer content).
Yes, #5 will give you benifit to buffs. I havent heard of a better idea myself to give entertainers a "special" in the GCW, and noone else has posted a betteridea in the GCW boards. This special would only be for Overt Entertainers, and not any other class.
I know this is good ol' Bootstraps idea of helping...for that I suppose we are all at least a little happy he is making some attempt. You need to let him know though he needs to change his way of thinking.
This idea was proposed by another entertainer. Boot included it because it was an idea like anyone else. There is no need for anyone to "change their way of thinking" He has his right to an opinion as anyone else does, as long as it dosent influence his position. Boot is just a player, just like me, just like you. He cannot change the game. He is not responsable for what has been done in game to make entertaining broken. You may not like his opinions, but they are his, and not everyones. Bootstrap is a fair person, and if you guys vote for you issue, and it makes top 10, he will push for your issue just like anything else and that is that.
Entertainers are already in the GCW....we get to be factioned as well as being able to go overt. *small wry smile* Before anyone really sensitive from H4KD gets upset that I am attacking their boy, nope nope...think again. This is not a flame. I am merely trying to point out a fact, and that really isn't content for us, because although some of us think we shouldn't be in this game, we already are.
Hey, if you dont feel its good enough content for Entertainers, then thats fine. I think it would be a good idea for entertainers to get something "special" while actually involved in the GCW (being overt) If you really dont like it I still encourage you to vote for SOMETHING in the GCW, and make your vote count. only 10 are going to make it for the "final push" and that still dosent say much.
The title of the link:
Vote for your favorite idea/concept
Number 5 (i.e. our entertainer content to vote on):
Entertainers in the GCW
Again, no offense Phrixus, but we should already be accounted for in the GCW without us having to vote that there are actually live people who play entertainers and like to be counted/included/have a playable game with our class. It really isn't like a novel side thing such as factionable bases, battlefields, fighter bases, mission terminals, faction armor,or something else listed there.
Truthfully, I want you to be counted and included in this, or I wouldnt have made the post in the first place. I want you guys to have something "special". It isnt going to happen though by saying "we should already be accounted for in the GCW without us having to vote" because it wouldnt be fair to others that want a vote and believe in their issues as strong as you do in yours. The Devs are not and I repeat NOT going to fix everything the way we want it. All we can do is press an issue and hope they look. Here is a chance for you guys, take it or leave it.
You only get 1 vote. I am a huge PVP'er and there are lots of stuff I would like to see fixed in the GCW. (bases, turrets, etc)
I gave my vote to include Entertainer.
KaiaClodgah
Fri Nov 26, 2004 10:24 am
#6
stupid question here, when GCW hits, will EVERYONE be overt? If so, at least that'll get rid of the bots, heh
Valarena
Fri Nov 26, 2004 10:29 am
#7
KaiaClodgah wrote:stupid question here, when GCW hits, will EVERYONE be overt? If so, at least that'll get rid of the bots, heh
they'll just go neutral sadly and no i don't think we will all be overt
Oqua
Fri Nov 26, 2004 10:30 am
#8
Yes, #5 will give you benifit to buffs. I havent heard of a better idea myself to give entertainers a "special" in the GCW, and noone else has posted a betteridea in the GCW boards. This special would only be for Overt Entertainers, and not any other class.
Phrixus,
I looked again, but I didn't see it listed like that. If it was, then its someplacenot on that list, which was the purpose of my post. Nothing more nothing less. The way its listed, doesn't make it look like anything you said.
Oh, and again, no where did I say this was a flame on your boy....so please, don't try and stir up the pot okies? I am just saying if he is posting content for entertainers, maybe we might see it worded in a different way so we might actually see it?
Again I wonder why you get so out of joint at me just pointing out a fact, but whatever.
I just merely was saying your number five didn't really say anything other then what I had stated and pointed out above.
Shaizann
Fri Nov 26, 2004 10:36 am
#9
If I may, what I think Oqua is saying is: The Entertainer option on the pole does not clearly state what it's there for. "Entertainers in the GCW" is a very generic option. If it's a proposal for a special buff enhancement for being an Overt entertainer, then perhaps it should read as exactly that.
Either way, I'm not sure if this is Daesdream's way of trying to make up for past remarks or what have you. It's hard to swallow him coming from an "Entertainer's are worthless" stance to "Let me try to help out" stance in less than a month's time. However, the offer is appreciated at least on my part.
Either way, I'm not sure if this is Daesdream's way of trying to make up for past remarks or what have you. It's hard to swallow him coming from an "Entertainer's are worthless" stance to "Let me try to help out" stance in less than a month's time. However, the offer is appreciated at least on my part.
Dreamland
Fri Nov 26, 2004 2:26 pm
#10
For anyone coming in and seeing that poll they are going to read,Entertainers in the GCW. (exactly what #5 says) think huh?, and vote for something else. The only thing this poll will indicate is how many entertainers participate in it and vote for number 5.
There is nothing there saying how they are to be included. Basicaly noone is gonna get it. In fact with only one vote i have to say its a pretty useless poll. Limited information about any of the points and one vote does not make for a comprehensive survey.
Message Edited by Dreamland on 11-26-2004 01:30 PM
PoetDancer
Fri Nov 26, 2004 2:51 pm
#11
Why do we have to choose between these things, and what purpose does this survey serve? I find a lot of these things beneficial, not only in terms of entertainment, but also in the other things we as players do.
Any one of these changes will no doubt make many players happy. My own theory behind PvP and the GCW is that if it cannot spontaneously come up in order to be enjoyable, it doesn't really serve a purpose. And it will never get to that level if the difference between the most effective players in PvP and the lowest level is so large, it is not worth the lower level players time to even contribute.
The BEST thing anyone can do to invigorate the GCW is to level the playing field somewhat. Make it so both the stronger and the weaker player have an incentive to work. Right now, superior players don't have to work very hard to kill weaker players (even masters of some combat professions), and weaker players have absolutely no chance to defeat a stronger player, even if they approach in overwhelming numbers with good (not supernatural) equipment.
If you can do that, it may be worth my while to master the fencer profession as well as dancerin the hopes of contributing to the GCW as a fighter. But considering how multiple profession stackers and loot items have made mastering one profession pretty pointless, I either have to resign myself to the Cantinas, or abandon my Cantina role to take a meaningful role in the GCW.
A Master Dancer has 144 skill points remaining. Its enough to master a seperate combat branch, and have 52 points left over for other things. If you can make those 144 skill points useful in PvPat the highest level, then that's all the reason I or anydancer needs to get involved in the GCW or PvP.
Message Edited by PoetDancer on 11-26-2004 05:41 PM
Goldshadow
Fri Nov 26, 2004 3:04 pm
#12
Thank you Phrixus for bringing this here.
The entertainer that presented a way to include entertainers in the GCW was me. Here is a link to the post I made Clicky
I also included this in Boot's request for ideas. There was considerable discussion about the idea as well as alternative suggestions.
Maybe I'm biased, but take a look. I think that there should be options for entertainers who want to be more involved in the GCW without learning combat skills
I also included this in Boot's request for ideas. There was considerable discussion about the idea as well as alternative suggestions.
Maybe I'm biased, but take a look. I think that there should be options for entertainers who want to be more involved in the GCW without learning combat skills
Oqua
Fri Nov 26, 2004 3:22 pm
#13
Goldshadow wrote:
Thank you Phrixus for bringing this here.
The entertainer that presented a way to include entertainers in the GCW was me. Here is a link to the post I made Clicky
I also included this in Boot's request for ideas. There was considerable discussion about the idea as well as alternative suggestions.
Maybe I'm biased, but take a look. I think that there should be options for entertainers who want to be more involved in the GCW without learning combat skills
I know you did Roho, I saw the thread initially when you made it.
As I stated previously, if thats what number five is "supposed" to mean, then thats great.
The whole reason I posted was because number five doesn't say that. I think I have stated that twice. But maybe I am not writing it correctly or something..*small smile* although I have read my posts over and over again, and I do think its pretty clear why I stated things the way I did.
Not fussing at you Roho (or anyone for that matter) but again, I think my whole problem with the list was the way it was worded. The meaning behind number five is cloudy and opaque at best as is (or as it was, don't know if they went back to rewrite it). I just didn't see "Entertainers in the GCW" as "content". I thought we were already there.
I also thanked Boot for making the list and attempting to include us in my initial post. But I guess that was missed too in what I said.
If I seem overly picky about this, its because I don't wish for a fiasco to happen like the last time I posted...when legitimate concerns were thought of as flames...when I thought I had articulated things pretty well to convey my ideas and concerns but obviously hadn't.
Page 1 of 2