Jump To Lightspeed Archive
Thread: The OFFICIAL Don't Ruin Kessel Petition
gera
Thu Nov 11, 2004 6:19 pm
#157
Juusman wrote:
Slarus wrote:
That may be true Slarus, but the GCW needs to be fixed. It's just stupid the way it is now. I think it should be more like the jedi system. The more you kill opposing faction NPCs, the higher likelihood that you will be "black listed" or made permanently overt. Maybe you could then visit an ID and have your appearance changed to go overt again.
I know you don't like PvP, but many players are part-time PvP'ers at least. SOE needs to fix the GCW to bring this element back into the game.
That is a matter of debate I agree I dont feel enough is done with the GCW, but I dont think forced PvP is the solution, forced PvP is a cheap way out. Something does need to be done to allow covert and overts to do something, but more PvP is not the only answer and shouldnt be the answer.
Why don't you whine that TEFs are forced PvP? And don't give me that crap that it's ok because it's explained in the rule book.
Whether you like it or not, this game already has forced PvP under certain situations, and well it should. If you like to go around killing imperial or rebel NPCs, you should know that you're going to become well known to players and NPCs alike - and will eventually become permanently overt. That just makes simple sense.
Because you don't need to kill Stormtroopers or Rebels to MASTER your proffession in ground... Is it hard to understand?
I dont really tell the other things like: You can avoid being TEF by not killing NPC's because there are plenty of others to kill. You dont need to do 'faction' missions to master. You don't need to do faction missions in front of other Overts. You can as well do faction missions and get TEF in a safe area excepting if you are unlucky you can get shot. Don't confuse those two to each other...
Message Edited by gera on 11-11-2004 05:22 PM
Slarus
Thu Nov 11, 2004 7:33 pm
#158
Why don't you whine that TEFs are forced PvP? And don't give me that crap that it's ok because it's explained in the rule book.
Whether you like it or not, this game already has forced PvP under certain situations, and well it should. If you like to go around killing imperial or rebel NPCs, you should know that you're going to become well known to players and NPCs alike - and will eventually become permanently overt. That just makes simple sense.
I dont agree with TEFs but at least this was published as a possibility. If I thought I could stop it I would, but TEFs are rare for most coverts and if your careful it is much easier to avoid PvP with a TEF then in JTL. I have never had to PvP as a result of a TEF, it may happen but I have not as of yet.
a1davida1
Thu Nov 11, 2004 7:35 pm
#159
While your points are good slarus, and i respect you for that and your point of view, you have yet to show why Kessel should go non pvp. That is a bigger injustice to the PvP community than making master mission in there was to the PvE community (arguably).
Two wrongs do not make a right =*( thx middle school.
Slarus
Thu Nov 11, 2004 7:42 pm
#160
While your points are good slarus, and i respect you for that and your point of view, you have yet to show why Kessel should go non pvp. That is a bigger injustice to the PvP community than making master mission in there was to the PvE community (arguably).
Two wrongs do not make a right =*( thx middle school.
I don't think Kessel should be PvE I absolutly hate Kessel being PvE, I want them to change it back. I do however want the Master Mission to conform to the Consensual PvP and be a PvE mission. If they wanted PvP involved they should have said from the beginning or at least as soon as they decided, and there should have been a PvP element to it such as kill 5 enemy players, as it was now PvP was a matter of location and didn't have anything to do with the mission. I wouldn't like to be forced to PvP for an advancement mission but at least that would have made more sense.
Vicotnik
Thu Nov 11, 2004 7:53 pm
#161
FredP wrote:
EMC2 wrote:
Head for Deep Space if you want PvP.
Why don't you head to X-Wing vs TIE Fighter is you want PvE? It cuts both ways. This kind of thinking is not the solution but only a reaffirmation of the problem.
I think you meant to say X-wing: Alliance. X-wing vs TIE Fighter was more of a multiplayer/PvP game than a PvE game.
a1davida1
Thu Nov 11, 2004 7:57 pm
#162
What about hte issue of alot of people liking to have to pvp for master, the challenge of it?
Why dont they let the PvE'rs grind out the 7.5 million because that is after all what they like to do, kill npcs. Let those who want the pvp experience involved in master like alot do be able to do it the old way, both sides are happy.
Slarus
Thu Nov 11, 2004 8:09 pm
#163
What about hte issue of alot of people liking to have to pvp for master, the challenge of it?
Why dont they let the PvE'rs grind out the 7.5 million because that is after all what they like to do, kill npcs. Let those who want the pvp experience involved in master like alot do be able to do it the old way, both sides are happy.
As it never was a requirement just an environmental possibility your statement is unfounded. The mission write doesn't require any PvP interaction only your presence subjected you to the possibility of it. The mission was and always has been a PvE mission in PvP space, the issue was is PvP is consensual.
From the FAQ:
How is overt and covert going to work in space?
No "covert" in space.
In normal space zones: If you choose to be overt then you will be overt and attackable only by other overts and NPCs. If you choose not to be overt then there will be no TEF if you decide to attack NPCs of the opposite faction soyou will remain unattackable by overt players, unlike the ground game. PvP will be purely consensual.
You as a player can declare Overt and be subject to PvP while doing your master mission no one, I repeat NO ONE is stopping you from doing that. You can choose to be PvP. The mission never required PvP kills and is not up for debate as PvP will be purely consensual, you can CHOOSE to become overt when the final changes are made.
I can't understand other then laziness why you cant declare if you want the possible challenge of PvP while doing ANY missions, even back at Novice after the training mission, you could have gone Overt for each mission. You have to choose, the other PvPers have to choose, but no one is forced and that is 100% right, choice is the key the only issue all else is moot.
sirsri
Thu Nov 11, 2004 8:10 pm
#164
you have deep space. Make kessel a decent high end PvE zone. There should be both, since there is no purpose to PvP in kessel other than griefing people on their master missions, make it into a PvE zone, and leave deep space to PvPers.
Slarus
Thu Nov 11, 2004 8:12 pm
#165
you have deep space. Make kessel a decent high end PvE zone. There should be both, since there is no purpose to PvP in kessel other than griefing people on their master missions, make it into a PvE zone, and leave deep space to PvPers.
Kessel should be PvP, the Devs promised 2 wild space zones with PvP and I feel if they went back and corrected thier mistakes on consensual PvP and the Piloting tree missions they should stick to thier word on 2 wild space zones it's only fair.
a1davida1
Thu Nov 11, 2004 8:23 pm
#166
Thank you for that point slarus. Also it is the best place to gain xp, you gain this fast xp at the increased risk of being killed. This is consentual pvp for a reward, the way it should be.
Slarus
Thu Nov 11, 2004 8:26 pm
#167
Thank you for that point slarus. Also it is the best place to gain xp, you gain this fast xp at the increased risk of being killed. This is consentual pvp for a reward, the way it should be.
Kessel will be PvP again, and a month after it is no one will be XPing there, it wont be practical, XPing in Kessel was possible do to most people just wanting to finish Pilot then PvP.
a1davida1
Thu Nov 11, 2004 8:27 pm
#168
Slarus wrote:
What about hte issue of alot of people liking to have to pvp for master, the challenge of it?
Why dont they let the PvE'rs grind out the 7.5 million because that is after all what they like to do, kill npcs. Let those who want the pvp experience involved in master like alot do be able to do it the old way, both sides are happy.
As it never was a requirement just an environmental possibility your statement is unfounded. The mission write doesn't require any PvP interaction only your presence subjected you to the possibility of it. The mission was and always has been a PvE mission in PvP space, the issue was is PvP is consensual.
From the FAQ:
Well perhaps i should have said the RISK of pvp rather than having to pvp. Leave people this risk, but give them the option to grind the xp the PvE way, allowing for consentual pvp like you want. How is this not an agreeable solution?
How is overt and covert going to work in space?
No "covert" in space.
In normal space zones: If you choose to be overt then you will be overt and attackable only by other overts and NPCs. If you choose not to be overt then there will be no TEF if you decide to attack NPCs of the opposite faction soyou will remain unattackable by overt players, unlike the ground game. PvP will be purely consensual.
You as a player can declare Overt and be subject to PvP while doing your master mission no one, I repeat NO ONE is stopping you from doing that. You can choose to be PvP. The mission never required PvP kills and is not up for debate as PvP will be purely consensual, you can CHOOSE to become overt when the final changes are made.
I can't understand other then laziness why you cant declare if you want the possible challenge of PvP while doing ANY missions, even back at Novice after the training mission, you could have gone Overt for each mission. You have to choose, the other PvPers have to choose, but no one is forced and that is 100% right, choice is the key the only issue all else is moot.
Overtness is pointless, ive explained this enough times it needs no further explaining, oh and yes i believe in consentual pvp, i just want my pvp zone back. Because just like you should have the right not to pvp, i should have the right to be able to.
Slarus
Thu Nov 11, 2004 8:36 pm
#169
Well perhaps i should have said the RISK of pvp rather than having to pvp. Leave people this risk, but give them the option to grind the xp the PvE way, allowing for consentual pvp like you want. How is this not an agreeable solution?
Or just declare Overt and have it the same mission, no need for two ways, overt is pointless to you people who WANT PvP will declare if not then they did not really want to PvP.
Overtness is pointless, ive explained this enough times it needs no further explaining, oh and yes i believe in consentual pvp, i just want my pvp zone back. Because just like you should have the right not to pvp, i should have the right to be able to.
No you haven't explained it, you declared it pointless there is a difference. You'll never prove you cant PvP when you can declare being Overt, it may not be convienent for you but it allows you the choice it doesn't prevent you from PvPing. You can declare, try it out before you declare it pointless and it is only until they fix the mission and get kessel back to PvP.
I want your PvP zone back but you can't claim something that doesnt exsist PvP is still in game, it was not taken away.
I can't wait for Kessel to go back to PvP, so you shut up, your whinning, you have no basis other then saying Kessel should be returned to PvP, but YOU can still PvP in the mean time, whinning about NO PvP is a lie you have PvP you just dont like having to do it that way at least you'd be honest if you put it that way but you lie instead.