Dancer Archive
Thread: would appreciate your support
Page 2 of 2
ArgentWulf
Fri Mar 26, 2004 6:06 am
#14
This is one of the very few times I have to disagree with you, Sultrina.
Sultrina wrote:
I know I am in the minority here but I don't think deny service of any kind is a good idea and I don't find entertaienrs healing in the middle of a battle field a very good idea either
While I do not deny service often I find it has its uses. Example a dancer has aTEF andis killed. They clone, head to the cantina to cure mind wounds and BF and end up dancing and healing the very same people that killed them. Talk about feeling used! Without the deny service command I would feel utterly degraded. I could be neutral, (I feel I have a stake in the GCW however), I could dance elsewhere (why should I have to travel) or I could wait until the offenders leave (this gives then power over me). If you havn't guessed it already, this has happened to me.
Panthu
Sat Mar 27, 2004 4:14 am
#15
I'm not sure I understand... sorry. ><
I thought you were saying it should work like medic healing instead of having a real /denyfaction or the third one with a /denyfaction. "If you must be covert, you'd get a TEF for doing this" I read as "if you must be covert, you'd get a TEF for /denyfaction... but if you were overt it would be auto". That made sense to me because that's how medic healing works. The only medic healing that's passive though is CM area heals which do give a TEF w/o a warning if an overt of your faction is healed AFAIK. I've seen CMs complain about it, so it looks like that's how it works.
Pretty much everybody posting in that thread including silly agreed that there should be some kind of risk involved with any kind of factional deny, but I think Silly was just trying to get the in the battle problem looked at. I don't think she was really saying how to work out what it would mean for cantina play. She seemed to be agreeing with others that something should be done to protect that aspect, and she wasn't trying to stop that.
I'm guessing anything that keeps her enemies from getting healed by her in battle will make her happy and she is probably usually already overt anyway since she is also doing pistols. *looks around for Silly* I know very little about this in practice though, so you'd have to ask her.
Personally, I'm all for 20 million different ways to deny any group of people the dancer doesn't want to heal: griefers, bad tippers, old enemies, other factions, anybody but their guild/friends/team. I don't really understand why Sultrina would care that I might be a really mean Dancer that likes to dance in the same cantina she is but won't heal anyone. It should just mean that she would have more fans. I don't think there's anyway that giving us the power to heal or not heal whomever we like could possibly damage our reputation. If we had never been set up as passive only healers, people wouldn't have expected it.
Giving us each the power to decide whether we want to heal just a few people or everyone would create some distinction between the interacting ent and the AFK freebie bot. Those that wanted to stay open to the public could just choose to never deny anyone at all, as they do now.
I thought you were saying it should work like medic healing instead of having a real /denyfaction or the third one with a /denyfaction. "If you must be covert, you'd get a TEF for doing this" I read as "if you must be covert, you'd get a TEF for /denyfaction... but if you were overt it would be auto". That made sense to me because that's how medic healing works. The only medic healing that's passive though is CM area heals which do give a TEF w/o a warning if an overt of your faction is healed AFAIK. I've seen CMs complain about it, so it looks like that's how it works.
Pretty much everybody posting in that thread including silly agreed that there should be some kind of risk involved with any kind of factional deny, but I think Silly was just trying to get the in the battle problem looked at. I don't think she was really saying how to work out what it would mean for cantina play. She seemed to be agreeing with others that something should be done to protect that aspect, and she wasn't trying to stop that.
I'm guessing anything that keeps her enemies from getting healed by her in battle will make her happy and she is probably usually already overt anyway since she is also doing pistols. *looks around for Silly* I know very little about this in practice though, so you'd have to ask her.
Personally, I'm all for 20 million different ways to deny any group of people the dancer doesn't want to heal: griefers, bad tippers, old enemies, other factions, anybody but their guild/friends/team. I don't really understand why Sultrina would care that I might be a really mean Dancer that likes to dance in the same cantina she is but won't heal anyone. It should just mean that she would have more fans. I don't think there's anyway that giving us the power to heal or not heal whomever we like could possibly damage our reputation. If we had never been set up as passive only healers, people wouldn't have expected it.
Giving us each the power to decide whether we want to heal just a few people or everyone would create some distinction between the interacting ent and the AFK freebie bot. Those that wanted to stay open to the public could just choose to never deny anyone at all, as they do now.
Page 2 of 2