Smuggler Archive
Thread: Revamp Discussion: Contraband/Missions PART 2 (Solutions)
KaBhaal wrote:
All the "enhancement" a PvPer needs is the opportunity to kill another player. Those who choose to PvP need no additional reward because PvP is a reward unto itself to those players with that sick mentality. To reward a PvPer beyond his need to thrust the unpleasantness of death, trash-talk, and griefing upon another player is grossly unbalancing.
I Roleplay Frequently, and that sometimes leads me to PvP, I do not have a 'sick mentality' and I don't thirst for anyones blood enough for PvP to be its own reward... If I take the risk of a professional vigilante coming after me, you bet I want a higher reward.
It Curdles my blood when I see a Social person, who would never grief another person steriotyping folks he doesn't know.
Not I nor any of the PvP players I associate with engage in 'trash talk' or 'griefing'.
However you feel about PvP Flaming GM is not the answer and is definately not constructive. Instead of just ranting about the 1% of 'Leet D00ds' in the game why not post your Ideas for a solution? that is what this thread is for after all.
Personally I think the High Risk/Low Risk missions are a fair and equitable solution that provides all the players with 'thier universal right to choose'
"The addition of missions with a visibility/PvP/bounty aspect is to enhance the game for the players who are interested in pursuing that kind of gameplay. It doesn't exclude PvEers from anything but what they want to be excluded from."
This is patently false. The scheme that you have proposed inherently denies PvEers the frequency of high risk missions and the frequency of rewards. You even admit this when you state that, "[t]here's nothing preventing [PvEers] from occasionally taking a high risk mission." (emphasis added) GEE! Thanks for throwing me some scraps!
All the "enhancement" a PvPer needs is the opportunity to kill another player. Those who choose to PvP need no additional reward because PvP is a reward unto itself to those players with that sick mentality. To reward a PvPer beyond his need to thrust the unpleasantness of death, trash-talk, and griefing upon another player is grossly unbalancing.
But the denials thrust upon PvEers run deeper. Let's assume a component for a hypothetical uber Muon is only obtainable through missions which risk PvP. The PvP player can run those high risk missions all day long, amass the necessary components, mass produce uber Muon, have a vendor reliably stocked with uber Muon, and thereby gain a higher market share of the Muon market. Whereas, the PvE player is PENALIZED and veritably excluded from his market share by having to run high risk missions less frequently, thereby obtaining far less of the hypothetical uber Muon component, having an unreliably stocked vendor, etc. Well, as a rabid PvEer, I don't want to be excluded from having as large a market share and I want to be able to run "high risk" missions every bit as frequently as PvPers WITHOUT the threat of trash-talking, griefing PvPers. So, clearly, since I don't want to be excluded from the frequency of high risk missions, I AM being excluded from something I don't want to be excluded from, and your assertion fails. Imagine if the reward for high risk missions were damage or speed weapon upgrade kits or percentage increasing knives. Then only the serious PvPing Smugglers would receive the lion's share of slicing business. This is patently unfair and patently exclusive of PvEers. PvEers should be able to experience the FULL BREADTH of the game without the risk pf PvP. Heck, SOE's EverSmack is this way exactly. Why can't SWGO copy SOE's previous, HIGHLY SUCCESSFUL pattern? Even Asheron's Call has(a) dedicated PvP server(s), andPvP is PURELY voluntary on the non-PvP servers.
GM, you went on to say that PvEers being stuck with lesser missions with a lesser reward is "a very loaded statement." Yet you IMMEDIATELY contradicted your self by saying, "there is a path for PvPers and that path includes additional rewards." By definition, if PvPers get additional rewards, PvEers MUST get lesser rewards.
GM, your attempt to justify these greater rewards falls short of even the descriptor "weak". The attemptis frankly hollow and utterly baseless. What's the increased risk? Suffering trash-talk from PvPers? Suffering the grief of a 3-cap from a PvPer? Suffering a "I-get-the-all-important-first-shot-and-then-you're-dead", horribly unbalanced PvP duel? Give me a break! The outcome of a failed PvE encounter and a failed PvP encounter is by all reasonable accounts the same: character death. However yourutterly indefensibleposition is that those who will risk the headache of trash-talk, and griefing, and a terribly lop-sided contestshould be lavished with riches. That's ridiculous.
GM, you go on torespond to SilverSaberthat, "[w]hile you may not enjoy PvP, or you may have had bad experiences, a large number of the player base regularly play PvP. You know it's important for the devs to have a realistic view of the game. It's just as important that you have one.
ChrystalRhayne wrote:
Personally I would like to see a patch like Droids Rebuilt for the Smuggler's....you know one that has a
spiffy name to it....a real special patch...I would feel so loved.
Long Live the Emperor Message Edited by JTGAlpha on 07-05-2004 05:14 PM
majorslappy wrote:
My objection to PvP has nothing to do with the risk. I love risk. I just took a smuggler/pikeman (3212) into the Geo labs on Yavin. I had a blast! Risk is not the issue.
The issue is that PvP players want to "kill" other players. PvE players don't want to do that. I don't want to kill your chacter or any other players' character. I want to play the game a different way altogether than you as a PvP player.