Jump To Lightspeed Archive

---

Diorchas wrote:

---

Psiax wrote:

---

Diorchas wrote:

I'm not naive. I know the possibility exists that the changes wrought by the Devs could well end up permanent. And I'll go on record right now as a staunch PvEr that that would be a terrible decision. I want you guys to have meaningful PvP as much as you do. I just want you to be given content that is pleasing to you that does not force me into a style of gameplay that I dislike. Intensely. hehehe

You're misrepresenting me if you imply that I call all PvP combat "griefing." That was neither what I said or implied. Load camping is griefing. Attacking someone who is participating in a PvE mission to the extent that they cannot complete said mission is griefing. I suspect you will agree with me about the former and disagree about the latter. But it's really about our definition of "griefing". To me, if I am trying to accomplish something in a PvE context and am gated frtom completing it by another player, that is griefing.

---

I certainly appreciate and agree with your hope for meaningful opportunities to PvP in game. In my opinion, it probably will never happen.

You are correct; it does boil down to a definition of "griefing". Load killing is griefing, as most will agree. Until today, the master mission WAS in a PvP context. It was voluntary to undertake, and clearly stated as being within an open PvP zone. Regardless of intent or desire of the mission holder, it can not be considered griefing to attack someone in a clearly identified, open PvP zone that was voluntary to enter. The "don't shoot me" attempts made by certain players in the zone failed because that is one of the oldest tricks in the book to get the upper hand on someone.

The fact that the mission had a "PvE" objective is irrelevant; faction targets and faction missions on the ground have always been PvE, and attacking a factioned NPC if you were a member of that faction generates consequences (a TEF) that expose you to the possibility of PvP. I would trade what has happened to Kessel in a second for TEFs to be generated on factioned player pilots who kill NPCs of the opposing faction. The PvE crowd could all be neutral pilots and not have to PvP (unless the three neutral 'factions' were able to attack each other(?) ).

Once you join the Rebel or Imperial faction--as a pilot, or on the ground--you have by definition taken a stance in the GCW. You should face the possibility of consequences for that decision whenever you choose to take action against PCs or NPCs of the opposing faction. If you take no action, you can remain a covert supporter and not have to face the possibility of PvP. This is how faction membership works on the ground. This was the point of Rebel and Imperial factions when SWG was conceived and first launched. It is a point I think many have forgotten.

---

The Master Mission was not in a PvP context. PvP was ancillary to the mission, not a part of it. If the mission had been "Kill 30 NPCs and 5 PCs of the opposing faction, then take on the Corvette" you would be right. As it is, the only connection between the two is that you had a PvE mission that took place in a FFA PvP zone. THAT is what the PvE community was up in arms about. The fact that we could not complete a PvE mission because of enforced PvP gameplay.

Please stop with the "voluntary" nonsense. RPers and PvPers alike see profession mastery as an endgoal. To say that mastering one's profession is "voluntary" is disingenuous. To powergamers it is THE endgoal. To roleplayers it is about the journey taken to get to that goal. But the common thread is that it is a goal aspired to by just about everyone who undertakes a profession. To say "either PvP or don't Master" is incredibly selfish. Why should only PvPers be able to master their chosen profession? No other profession in the game requires PvP for Mastery (aside from Jedi, which is a world unto itself), and Pilot should be no different.

Thankfully the Devs saw that and made the right decision, even if they did overreact considerably in the execution of that decision.

---

It was simply an experiment by the devs to get some PvE'ers to try out PvP, that ultimately failed.

---

truewildman wrote:

---

Diorchas wrote:

---

Psiax wrote:

---

Diorchas wrote:

I'm not naive. I know the possibility exists that the changes wrought by the Devs could well end up permanent. And I'll go on record right now as a staunch PvEr that that would be a terrible decision. I want you guys to have meaningful PvP as much as you do. I just want you to be given content that is pleasing to you that does not force me into a style of gameplay that I dislike. Intensely. hehehe

You're misrepresenting me if you imply that I call all PvP combat "griefing." That was neither what I said or implied. Load camping is griefing. Attacking someone who is participating in a PvE mission to the extent that they cannot complete said mission is griefing. I suspect you will agree with me about the former and disagree about the latter. But it's really about our definition of "griefing". To me, if I am trying to accomplish something in a PvE context and am gated frtom completing it by another player, that is griefing.

---

I certainly appreciate and agree with your hope for meaningful opportunities to PvP in game. In my opinion, it probably will never happen.

You are correct; it does boil down to a definition of "griefing". Load killing is griefing, as most will agree. Until today, the master mission WAS in a PvP context. It was voluntary to undertake, and clearly stated as being within an open PvP zone. Regardless of intent or desire of the mission holder, it can not be considered griefing to attack someone in a clearly identified, open PvP zone that was voluntary to enter. The "don't shoot me" attempts made by certain players in the zone failed because that is one of the oldest tricks in the book to get the upper hand on someone.

The fact that the mission had a "PvE" objective is irrelevant; faction targets and faction missions on the ground have always been PvE, and attacking a factioned NPC if you were a member of that faction generates consequences (a TEF) that expose you to the possibility of PvP. I would trade what has happened to Kessel in a second for TEFs to be generated on factioned player pilots who kill NPCs of the opposing faction. The PvE crowd could all be neutral pilots and not have to PvP (unless the three neutral 'factions' were able to attack each other(?) ).

Once you join the Rebel or Imperial faction--as a pilot, or on the ground--you have by definition taken a stance in the GCW. You should face the possibility of consequences for that decision whenever you choose to take action against PCs or NPCs of the opposing faction. If you take no action, you can remain a covert supporter and not have to face the possibility of PvP. This is how faction membership works on the ground. This was the point of Rebel and Imperial factions when SWG was conceived and first launched. It is a point I think many have forgotten.

---

The Master Mission was not in a PvP context. PvP was ancillary to the mission, not a part of it. If the mission had been "Kill 30 NPCs and 5 PCs of the opposing faction, then take on the Corvette" you would be right. As it is, the only connection between the two is that you had a PvE mission that took place in a FFA PvP zone. THAT is what the PvE community was up in arms about. The fact that we could not complete a PvE mission because of enforced PvP gameplay.

Please stop with the "voluntary" nonsense. RPers and PvPers alike see profession mastery as an endgoal. To say that mastering one's profession is "voluntary" is disingenuous. To powergamers it is THE endgoal. To roleplayers it is about the journey taken to get to that goal. But the common thread is that it is a goal aspired to by just about everyone who undertakes a profession. To say "either PvP or don't Master" is incredibly selfish. Why should only PvPers be able to master their chosen profession? No other profession in the game requires PvP for Mastery (aside from Jedi, which is a world unto itself), and Pilot should be no different.

Thankfully the Devs saw that and made the right decision, even if they did overreact considerably in the execution of that decision.

---

It was simply an experiment by the devs to get some PvE'ers to try out PvP, that ultimately failed.

---

I really hope you're wrong about that, True, because if that's the case my estimation of the Devs' intelligence level just went way down. You don't turn someone on to a style of gaming by forcing them to do it. That just breeds resentment.

In any case, I hope they fix things for the PvP set. As long as the Master Mission stays out of Kessel, I'm 100% behind you guys having a place to play.

---

Diorchas wrote:

The Master Mission was not in a PvP context. PvP was ancillary to the mission, not a part of it. If the mission had been "Kill 30 NPCs and 5 PCs of the opposing faction, then take on the Corvette" you would be right. As it is, the only connection between the two is that you had a PvE mission that took place in a FFA PvP zone. THAT is what the PvE community was up in arms about. The fact that we could not complete a PvE mission because of enforced PvP gameplay.

Please stop with the "voluntary" nonsense. RPers and PvPers alike see profession mastery as an endgoal. To say that mastering one's profession is "voluntary" is disingenuous. To powergamers it is THE endgoal. To roleplayers it is about the journey taken to get to that goal. But the common thread is that it is a goal aspired to by just about everyone who undertakes a profession. To say "either PvP or don't Master" is incredibly selfish. Why should only PvPers be able to master their chosen profession? No other profession in the game requires PvP for Mastery (aside from Jedi, which is a world unto itself), and Pilot should be no different.

Thankfully the Devs saw that and made the right decision, even if they did overreact considerably in the execution of that decision.

---

Well, since you are forcing me to be pedantic:

con·text (n) 1. The part of a text or statement that surrounds a particular word or passage and determines its meaning. 2. The circumstances in which an event occurs; a setting.

The mission was set in a PvP zone. It was therefore in a PvP context.

It is not at all disingenuous to say that mastering a profession is voluntary. This game is designed with an open-ended skill system with that exact thought in mind; it is not necessary to master any profession in order to have a viable template. If master were the endgoal in SWG the servers would have been closed down long ago: the "journey" to master any given profession lasts between one hour and maybe ten days at the outside (for a casual player), pilot included. Nor is it selfish to say that someone who has chosen to join either the Rebellion or the Empire should be prepared to face players of the opposing faction.

It is true that no profession in the game requires PvP for mastery, including Jedi and Pilot. At the most, mastering pilot required you to be exposed to the POSSIBILITY of PvP. This is entirely consistent with membership and advancement in rank within a faction in the GCW. I would have no problem with neutral pilots being purely PvE all the way to master. If you associate yourself with the military forces of a side in the civil war, on the other hand, you should be prepared for the consequences.

Rebel and Imperial pilot are not regular professions: they are FACTIONAL professions. As such, they are PvP-oriented by definition. If the factional pilot professions were to show absolute consistency with the ground game, as you suggest they should, then Rebel and Imperial pilots should draw a TEF every time they attack an enemy NPC. I am curious as to why you have not addressed me on this point.

As for the inability of the PvE community to complete the master mission: I would be willing to bet that most of the people complaining about the mission never even attempted it.

Wildman is right. The master missions were difficult but by no means impossible. The devs were trying to encourage participation in the GCW; unfortunately the community did not want to try. It's fine with me. Now the PvE community has its cake and can eat it too. Mmmmmmm, cake.

---

Diorchas wrote:

I'm not naive. I know the possibility exists that the changes wrought by the Devs could well end up permanent. And I'll go on record right now as a staunch PvEr that that would be a terrible decision. I want you guys to have meaningful PvP as much as you do. I just want you to be given content that is pleasing to you that does not force me into a style of gameplay that I dislike. Intensely. hehehe

You're misrepresenting me if you imply that I call all PvP combat "griefing." That was neither what I said or implied. Load camping is griefing. Attacking someone who is participating in a PvE mission to the extent that they cannot complete said mission is griefing. I suspect you will agree with me about the former and disagree about the latter. But it's really about our definition of "griefing". To me, if I am trying to accomplish something in a PvE context and am gated frtom completing it by another player, that is griefing.

---

I certainly appreciate and agree with your hope for meaningful opportunities to PvP in game. In my opinion, it probably will never happen.

You are correct; it does boil down to a definition of "griefing". Load killing is griefing, as most will agree. Until today, the master mission WAS in a PvP context. It was voluntary to undertake, and clearly stated as being within an open PvP zone. Regardless of intent or desire of the mission holder, it can not be considered griefing to attack someone in a clearly identified, open PvP zone that was voluntary to enter. The "don't shoot me" attempts made by certain players in the zone failed because that is one of the oldest tricks in the book to get the upper hand on someone.

The fact that the mission had a "PvE" objective is irrelevant; faction targets and faction missions on the ground have always been PvE, and attacking a factioned NPC if you were a member of that faction generates consequences (a TEF) that expose you to the possibility of PvP. I would trade what has happened to Kessel in a second for TEFs to be generated on factioned player pilots who kill NPCs of the opposing faction. The PvE crowd could all be neutral pilots and not have to PvP (unless the three neutral 'factions' were able to attack each other(?) ).

Once you join the Rebel or Imperial faction--as a pilot, or on the ground--you have by definition taken a stance in the GCW. You should face the possibility of consequences for that decision whenever you choose to take action against PCs or NPCs of the opposing faction. If you take no action, you can remain a covert supporter and not have to face the possibility of PvP. This is how faction membership works on the ground. This was the point of Rebel and Imperial factions when SWG was conceived and first launched. It is a point I think many have forgotten.

Finally, your comparison of mastering pilot to mastering a ground profession is flawed. People mix and match on the ground because there are options. There are no options in space. Once you declare a faction you have one tree and one only that you can improve upon. If my character is a Rebel Pilot he cannot choose from the Imperial tree and vice versa. Thus, while Mastery of ones chosen Piloting profession may not be MANDATORY (as defined by the fact that there are no penalties for NOT mastering), if one wants their character to be the best at what they do, or they want their character to have access to allPvE content within the game (which at this point is more about MP ships than any game contentin the more traditional sense)they have no choice but to Master that given tree.

You are saying that a character should be gated from that Mastery if its player dislikes PvP. That's not a valid argument. You are starting with a flawed premise (that PvP=GCW is a universal truth) and as such the conclusions you draw from it are fundamentally incorrect.

Message Edited by Diorchas on 11-13-2004 06:19 AM

---

Diorchas wrote:

PvP != GCW.

As a Rebel Pilot I can go and knock NPC TIEs out of the (figurative) sky as I please. You're getting too caught up in your own worldview here, Psiax. Just because PvP=GCW for YOU doesn't mean that it works for everyone else.

The reason I haven't addressed your TEF argument is because I'm of two minds on it. I see your point and concede it if we're making a strict "one-to-one" corrollation between the ground game and JtL. So as far as that goes I can buy the TEF argument.

The problem is that you're still not addressing a key point, which is that this is a game and people play games to have fun. Take my case, for instance. I've been a fan of the Star Wars world for as long as I've been able to be a fan of anything. The first movie came out when I was 4 (yes, I know I'm dating myself here), so I grew up playing make-believe Star Wars with my friends. At the risk of sounding a little geekish, I've been waiting for this game (SWG) to come out since before MMOs were pie-in-the-sky dreams.

But I want to play in this game for the roleplay value, not for the PvP. Does that mean that I shouldn't be able to play a Rebel Pilot? Why should I, as a roleplayer, not be allowed to enjoy the game to the fullest simply because PvP is not something I enjoy all the time? Keep in mind, I am NOT saying that participating in the GCW should favour my style of play over yours. I am simply saying that there need to be options. That is why, on the other hand, I am against TEF in space. While I see the rational reasons for it, especially as compared to the ground game, it simply wouldn't be a lot of fun for me to ALWAYS be open to PvP whenever I wanted to play a Rebel Pilot. Do you see where I'm coming from here?

Plus, there's something else you're forgetting. You're making a connection between PvP and GCW as if the PvP crowd only wanted to further the immersion of the GCW. Whether you like to admit it or not, the majority of the PvP crowd could care less about creating an immersive environment consistent with Star Wars canon. I'll tell you straight up, if I thought for a moment that I could PvP with mature, intelligent people on the opposing side I would be doing it often. The sad truth is that such intelligence and maturity can NOT be counted on. If I heard "So goes the Rebellion, traitor!" after getting shot down instead of "PNWED! U SUXXORS NOOB!!!!!" I'd be a lot more likely to take part in your idealistic notion of PvP = GCW.

Until that day comes, it's only fair that I be allowed to play this game in a way that suits me and that means that I am not forced to deal with the sorts of people that ruin the immersion and fun of the game. I've said before and I'll say it again, the only people that PvP folks have to blame for the stereotypes about them is themselves. There is a reason that most people are PvE and as long as we are the majority, games like SWG will need to provide a gratifying, enjoyable experience for us. That doesn't mean they ignore the PvP community, it only means that they need to look after PvE first and then do what they can to provide meaningful gameplay for PvP that does not infringe upon the rights of others.

You're taking a stance that one style of gameplay should be enforced upon people who want no part of it. No amount of rhetoric, however well-constructed, will ever make that acceptable or right.

Finally, your comparison of mastering pilot to mastering a ground profession is flawed. People mix and match on the ground because there are options. There are no options in space. Once you declare a faction you have one tree and one only that you can improve upon. If my character is a Rebel Pilot he cannot choose from the Imperial tree and vice versa. Thus, while Mastery of ones chosen Piloting profession may not be MANDATORY (as defined by the fact that there are no penalties for NOT mastering), if one wants their character to be the best at what they do, or they want their character to have access to all PvE content within the game (which at this point is more about MP ships than any game content in the more traditional sense) they have no choice but to Master that given tree.

You are saying that a character should be gated from that Mastery if its player dislikes PvP. That's not a valid argument. You are starting with a flawed premise (that PvP=GCW is a universal truth) and as such the conclusions you draw from it are fundamentally incorrect.

Message Edited by Diorchas on 11-13-2004 06:19 AM

---

Since you seem to believe that PvP does not equal the GCW, I invite you to read Chapter Sixteen of the Star Wars Galaxies manual, the chapter entitled "The Galactic Civil War". Chapter Sixteen is the PvP chapter. PvP may not equate to the GCW, but in this game, the converse is true. The GCW = PvP as far as players are concerned. PvP is defined as the way in which players are "allowed to fight one another within the context of the greater Galactic Civil War". Nowhere else in the manual is the GCW mentioned. The clear inference is that if you want to participate in the GCW, you must join a faction. With that choice comes the risk of facing players of the opposing faction. It means that you expose yourself to the possibility of PvP. If you choose not to do this, there are plenty of options available for you to live in the Star Wars universe.

You seem also to believe that many people who PvP "ruin the immersion and fun of the game." I would venture to say that the same proportion of the PvE and PvP populations play an equal role in doing this. Anyone who is not a Role-Player falls into this category, even if they have never tried PvP. The two issues are completely separate, and the change to Kessel has done absolutely nothing to change this aspect of the game. If I was of the mind to do it, I could log in right now, fly out to Kessel, and spam "PNWED! U SUXXORS NOOB!!!!!" (as you suggest) or any one of a number of choice phrases in spatial chat while I watch (watch!!) Rebel players attack and kill the Imperial corvette. I will have done just as good a job of ruining their immersion, and no PvP is involved.

For a time, I used to run around Tatooine in search of Rebel players doing NPC missions. If I found one, I would try to incap them. If I succeeded, I would begin to interrogate them. I would subject them to trial and summary judgment for crimes against the Empire before I DB'd them. While I did get a fair number of hate tells for this, I got an equal number of people who thanked me for the Role-Playing experience. Tell me, did PvP "ruin the immersion and fun" of the players I DB'd? I can tell you that the hate tells did affect mine.

I do understand that you want to play a Rebel Pilot, Diorchas. You want to immerse yourself in the role of a character in Star Wars, and pretend you are playing a part in the Rebellion. It is my hope that perhaps, in the course of this discussion, you might come to realize that your play as a Rebel is just that, play: essentially risk-free pretending that you are a Rebel. This is impossible on the ground. If you are able to immerse yourself completely in a role under these conditions, I commend you on your imagination. I hope you also realize, however, that PvP could have intensified greatly your immersive experience. Without it, you will not have the thrill of looking over your shoulder, wondering if intelligent (read: non-machine), motivated Imperial forces will attempt to prevent you from furthering the goals of the Rebellion. Nor will you enjoy the satisfaction of setting back the cause of the Empire in any real way, albeit temporarily.

No one was "gating" anyone from mastery; they were just making it a challenge, a challenge that would have encouraged teamwork, planning, and strategy in order to succeed. Face it, the corvette mission is no great challenge as it stands today. I watched three rebel players complete it yesterday without too much of a problem. It was an interesting feeling from an immersion standpoint, as an Imperial pilot, being completely powerless to defend Imperial assets. It took those three people less than minutes to destroy the corvette. When Kessel was PvP, that was a ten-minute window where you might have been exposed to PvP. It was never guaranteed.

Because it is now so easy, after you have completed the master mission, you might realize in time that your sense of accomplishment was fleeting; your victory, hollow. Today, the pilot helmet you receive is equivalent to a "Game Over" sign flashing across the screen, instead of the beginning of your true struggle against the Empire. Your "GCW" in space will consist of defeating mindless AI ad infinitum that in reality pose very little danger to you at all. That may be fun for a while, but I can tell you that most people will tire of it eventually. Even in their spiffy multiplayer ship. Do not let me rain on your parade, however. Enjoy yourself. As for PvP, well, Deep Space is unlikely to develop into much of a PvP zone. There is no real purpose to combat there, the zone is too small, the NPCs too closely packed, and you must pay to enter.

You wanted "access to all the PvE content in the game." Well, you and the rest of the PvE community defintely have received that. You are now allowed to kill 31 extra mindless MOBs without anyone interfering. Bravo. The multiplayer ships are not Player vs. Environment content, however. They are tools that may be used to engage in it. Yes, there may be additional "content" added to JtL in the future. I can bet it will involve a combination of the three ideas the developers managed to come up with for the expansion: 1) kill stuff; 2) disable and capture stuff while killing stuff; 3) escort stuff while killing stuff. In the meantime, go play at being a Rebel pilot and have fun killing NPCs. While doing that, I suggest that you ask yourself this question: what am I rebelling against?

I grew up with Star Wars as well. I saw the original movie in the theater on opening day. I know I am in the minority here, but in my mind, in the translation between the movies and this game, something big has been lost. For a brief moment, in the Kessel system, that ineffable quality was present in the game. Now it is gone again. Oh well, at least I got to experience it for a short while.

---

Diorchas wrote:

Psiax,

There are quite a few things about your post that confirm my belief that you simply cannot see out of your own worldview. Normally I would quote and pick apart, but I just don't have the energy for this argument anymore. Nothing anyone says who doesn't agree with is going to get through to you. You simply don't accept that any view other than yours is valid and that makes for a dull debate partner.

I'll close saying only that PvP is a choice and it should ALWAYS be a choice. If you cannot understand that then there is absolutely no point debating anything with you.

---

On the contrary, I understand you perfectly well. Your accusations, however, serve only to diminish the strength of your own arguments. Let them stand on their own merits. You want content without limits, fun without unwanted intrusions, and freedom of choice without consequences. I have absolutely no problem with that. Play your game as pure entertainment to your heart's content. I agree wholeheartedly: PvP is a choice and should always be a choice.

Let us now examine when a given player makes that choice, with regard to both JtL and the game as a whole.

In games, as in life, actions and decisions lead to results and consequences--some being positive, some negative. This game is set around a Galactic civil war. The ground game offers a clear choice: join a side in that war, or remain neutral with respect to it. Choosing a side in the war entails the acceptance of risk (i.e. exposure to PvP) with the possibility of rewards (i.e. access to equipment unavailable to those who remain neutral).

JtL was, inexplicably and illogically, implemented somewhat differently. You could join a faction as a pilot and not incur immediate negative consequences, other than the fact that NPC ships of the opposing faction became aggresive toward you. You still, however, chose a side in the civil war when you joined a faction as a pilot. The only risk associated with this choice in game came as you approached master, and had to enter a PvP-open Kessel.

Declaring your support for one side in the civil war should have consequences in space as it does on the ground. The unfortunate fact of the matter is that the designers have consistently pandered to the philosophy of "enjoyment without consequence" and have forgotten that the basic premise of factions on the ground was to facilitate the active engagement of players in the Galactic Civil War through direct competition, i.e. PvP. In the ground game, the choice to join a side in the civil war is when a player makes the decision and gives consent to open themselves to the possibility of PvP.

In my view, the same choice was made when entering pilot training for the Rebel or Imperial factions in JtL. Others may disagree. Intentionally or otherwise, the designers have failed to implement factions in space in a manner consistent with those on the ground. In addition, with the change to Kessel they have removed any consequences associated with the choice and benefits of taking part in the Galactic Civil War as a pilot.

I will tell you what changes should be made to JtL:

1) For Imperials and Rebels, the developers should institute TEFs for players who attack enemy ships of the opposing faction, regardless of zone.

2) Kessel should be restored as a FFA PvP zone, subject to the limits listed below.

3) Zone timers should be instituted to prevent load killing.

4) The planned 25% damage reduction should be applied.

5) Players who choose to be Neutral pilots should be unattackable by other factions, even in Kessel, thereby allowing pure PvE players to "experience all the content" and get their multiplayer ships. A third, neutral-only corvette would be needed to facilitate this.

6) Neutral players who want to PvP should be allowed to declare as Privateers, making them able to attack (or be attacked by) any overt player, whether Rebel, Neutral or Imperial.

7) All pilot skills should be wiped to even the playing field.

If these things were implemented, the wishes of both PvE and PvP oriented players would be addressed. There would be a viable GCW, with real goals. Rebel and Imperial would mean something. PvP would be completely consentual. No one would be "gated" from content. And JtL would have both challenge and, hopefully, some longevity. These things will never happen, however, because most people want all the positives without any of the negatives.

That was a good chuckle but I would like to point out the hypocrisy of your statment.

"Look man, I pay $15 a month to sit in this here X-Wing, and if I can't do anything I want, I am canceling."

Funnily enough, I see that your account is now cancelled.

A Typical Dev Meeting Behind the Scenes - Subject: Solo Group Nerf:

---

RedDestinyCC wrote:

This whole game is a dev project gone wrong. From the outset its been a design disaster. Here's another case of people without customer accountability (even though in the end I believe heads have and continue to roll) sitting in a conference room, absent communication with their customer community, going through conversations like this:

"OK what's next?" Boss-dev asks.

"Well, seems like a lot of people are complaining about the silliness of rugs costing $1 million, goofs the game."

"What do we do about it? Come on folks, we're a team. Be honest. What are your ideas?"

"Well its an economy, if we want to drive down prices, we have to increase supply," grunt Dev says knowing it will be shot down because of team leadership bias.

"No, you know how I feel about that. Other ideas?"

"Well we could come up with short term plugs and nerfs, but in the long run, if the content was full and compelling, they wouldn't worry about a rug."

"That's no help!!!, are you on this team or not?" Boss-dev huffs. "Well, then we have to cut off their ability to earn. Cripple them. How do they earn it now?"

"Selling $1 million rugs!"

"That's not funny! I want some serious conversation here, if you're on this team, play with the team. Have you seen how upset our customers are? Do you think they think this is funny? If our design weren't so poor... I mean if they'd just play the way I wanted them to play it... I mean if... well you know what I mean, just stay on track here."

"Well, a lot of the combat customers earn their money from solo grouping. We could nerf that," says young padawan dev.

"What? Why on earth would we nerf that?" dev-4 pipes up incredulously! "Without content, and with rugs costing $1 million, why do you want to hurt their ability to form groups, cause we don't if they're actually solo, or if they need the things they're harvesting, and they're serving the economy by providing goods like meat and hides that are so freaking rare and hard to gather in quantity that we practically force them to do this. And they when we force them to solo group because they know they can up the difficulty level and get more efficiency from their time they're investing, and by soloing because nobody else wants to go hunt all day that's needed, why not let them take advantage of guilds and groups who support each other by throwing bodies at it? It's a plus for hunters, a plus for guilds and groups, and plus for the economy, and it makes the players happy all around, and god knows they need that."

"Did you just make a crack about content? I don't appreciate that. Any other ideas about this or is nerfing the solo group the way to go?"

"But I just said why that's a bad idea...," dev-4 mumbles.

Boss dev glares at dev-4. "Anyone? OK how do we make it happen, and can we have it done by Friday? I need it for my progress report of enhancements to the Big Boys."

"But don't we want to post it for discussion? This is not going to be liked. We're handcuffing people again and cutting off their means to flourish."

"We don't have time for this. We must crush the economy. The economy continues to be our top priority. You know that. This isn't about enjoyment, this is about our careers, and this great social experiemetn that we're creating. It has to be a realistic SWG economy! It must. Rugs must not cost $1 million. Not while I'm still Boss Dev. It is my vision. Enjoyment be damned. I want to be immersed!!! and I'll crush house storage and resource spawns, and any other way I can curtail flourishing of the customers in order to get it."

"But as someone else already said, I went to college for 7 years through grad school and the first thing I learned about economics is that if you want to lower prices you have to increase supply. The same goes for the meats and other rare resources and loot items. If we want them to cost less, there needs to be more of them. Customer/players will still have to pursue the content to get them, or other game activities to be able to purchase them as consumers, so whats the harm of balancing out the loot instead of nerfing the player experience?"

"I went over that!!! Weren't you listening? Let's move on, I want that by Friday for my report, and whats the next item on the agenda?"

---

Message Edited by BleuDestiny on 11-16-2004 04:36 PM