Smuggler Archive

---

silversaber wrote:

---

Istin wrote:

b) The devsdesigned this game with the vision that PvP would be the pinacle of combat

content. Accept it. This will not change. It is part of their vision, and I should hope that

they will not change it. If you do not want PvP to have this role, go play City of Heros.

Player created content was intended to drive this game, not dev created content.

Utter BS. I would like you to show me where it was posted that this is the case. I have been participating on the official SWGForums LONG before Beta was initiated, and have never seen this stated. And also, keep you idiotic "go play something else" statements to yourself. That has NEVER been a valid arguement on these boards, and it isnt going to start now.

Siliver, you know that isn't true. The Devs have constantly brought forth the idea that SWG will be more player driven, then Dev created content. It's the whole "sandbox" idea. The Devs want the players to create their own stories, and want them to have the tools to do so.

c) I know that only about a quarter of people who play the game read these forums.

However, this quarter seems to bean accurate cross-section of the people that play, other

than that the non-readers aren't as "hard-core" as the readers. Point is....it seems that

there are many more proponents for the idea that PvP deserves greater rewards than PvP.

More BS. Just because a small bunch of PvPrs yell constantly and loudly, doesnt make them more numerous. Quite to the contrary, Neutrals far outnumber the combined numbers of Covert and Overt of both Factions.

The poll is to skewered to use it as a valid point. The true numbers is inaccurate because inactive characters were still used for the poll. Since most inactive characters are Neutral, the poll would show that.

d) Why aren't the PvErs crying over in the GCW forums about not being able to call an

ATST without being overt? That's forced PvP withoutthe same rewards....right?

Because the PvE players have long argued over how we are being screwed over inthe GCW with the Devs until we were blue oin the face, but they have basically ignored us. Believe me, alots PvE players are completly pissed on how we have gotten the short end of the stick with the GCW, contrary to what we were told before and even dureing Beta. But why keep yelling when it does no frigging good.

The Devs havn't ignored you at all. They took in all sides of the debate and tried to come up with a system that would satisfy everyone. There are many PvPers who don't like the system, just as i'm sure that there are many PvErs, but if neither extreme is happy, then you're doing the right thing. The Devs gave PvErs the opportunity to choose when and where they would participate in PvP by putting the Covert and Overt switch. All the control now lies in the Player to when they want to go into a possible PvP conflict.

This is very simliar to the proposed Smuggler Bounty system. Notice, that no player is ever forced to undego PvP gameplay. You're not hurt by choosing not to participate. Plus, you get to CHOOSE when you want to participate in it. You don't have to worry about random gankage. Because you'll know when to expect it. This is another centerpiece to SWG, the idea that players have the choice to do what they want. They are never forced to do anythjng. The idea of Forced PvP in SWGis a loaded term that creates instant aversion to PvP in general.

e) Why do you need equal rewards when all you're doing is PvEing?

Because I still maintain that PvE is no better and no WORSE than PvP, and thus we should get EQUAL risk mission with EQUAL rewards. The fact PvE has to tweek up a notch in difficultyto become roughleyequivelent is what I have been argueing on these boards.

But thats the problem.Of coursePvEers are not "inferior" or "lesser" to PvPers. Nor could you characterize them as afraid of danger. But this doesn't mean that AI enemies and player enemies are equal. Because they are not. The AI is inferior compared to a Player. This means that a mission with a Player Bounty Hunter is Riskier then a PvE mission.

---

---

-red

---

RougeSmuggler wrote:

The Devs havn't ignored you at all. They took in all sides of the debate and tried to come up with a system that would satisfy everyone. There are many PvPers who don't like the system, just as i'm sure that there are many PvErs, but if neither extreme is happy, then you're doing the right thing. The Devs gave PvErs the opportunity to choose when and where they would participate in PvP by putting the Covert and Overt switch. All the control now lies in the Player to when they want to go into a possible PvP conflict.

And now they are chipping away at the options bit by bit, by making Covert scanners far more easier to obtain and use than the Devssaid they would be when they were introduced. And what about that idiotic Imperial Crackdown that switches Coverts to Overt. This is voluntary? BS!

What ever happened to the PvE Battlefields that they put in so as that players could participate in the GCW without generating a TEF? They turned out to be so buggy, theyhad to takeem out and we havnt seen em since. What happened to them eh?

Yea, the Devs have really played fair with the PvE players in the GCW. NOT.

This is very simliar to the proposed Smuggler Bounty system. Notice, that no player is ever forced to undego PvP gameplay. You're not hurt by choosing not to participate. Plus, you get to CHOOSE when you want to participate in it. You don't have to worry about random gankage. Because you'll know when to expect it. This is another centerpiece to SWG, the idea that players have the choice to do what they want. They are never forced to do anythjng. The idea of Forced PvP in SWGis a loaded term that creates instant aversion to PvP in general.

Yea. And with the Devs previoustrack record with the GCW, just how long will it stay completely voluntary?

e) Why do you need equal rewards when all you're doing is PvEing?

Because I still maintain that PvE is no better and no WORSE than PvP, and thus we should get EQUAL risk mission with EQUAL rewards. The fact PvE has to tweek up a notch in difficultyto become roughleyequivelent is what I have been argueing on these boards.

But thats the problem.Of coursePvEers are not "inferior" or "lesser" to PvPers. Nor could you characterize them as afraid of danger. But this doesn't mean that AI enemies and player enemies are equal. Because they are not. The AI is inferior compared to a Player. This means that a mission with a Player Bounty Hunter is Riskier then a PvE mission.

I am going to let this part of thearguement go, since there is NO way we are going to see eye to eye on this. It just aint going to happen.

-red

---

---

silversaber wrote:

---

RougeSmuggler wrote:

The Devs havn't ignored you at all. They took in all sides of the debate and tried to come up with a system that would satisfy everyone. There are many PvPers who don't like the system, just as i'm sure that there are many PvErs, but if neither extreme is happy, then you're doing the right thing. The Devs gave PvErs the opportunity to choose when and where they would participate in PvP by putting the Covert and Overt switch. All the control now lies in the Player to when they want to go into a possible PvP conflict.

And now they are chipping away at the options bit by bit, by making Covert scanners far more easier to obtain and use than the Devssaid they would be when they were introduced. And what about that idiotic Imperial Crackdown that switches Coverts to Overt. This is voluntary? BS!

What ever happened to the PvE Battlefields that they put in so as that players could participate in the GCW without generating a TEF? They turned out to be so buggy, theyhad to takeem out and we havnt seen em since. What happened to them eh?

Yea, the Devs have really played fair with the PvE players in the GCW. NOT.

CounterPoint: Go look at one of the earliest letters from the staff on the main site. One of the primary objectives of theirs was to make EVERYONE feel that they were either participating in or viewing the GCW. Crackdown tried to emphasize that.

CounterPoint: No one at all cared about the battlefields. They were like planetside rehashed, only winning at one meant nothing. They were deactivated because no one played in them and PvP was essentially non-existant there.

CounterPoint: Covert scanners are generally placed near bases, a place where you generally wouldn't go if only looking for PvE. On Shadowfire, there was an imp base with turrets and a scanner placed too near a rebel's house. A CSR made the imps move the scanner so the person could get in the house without taking a TEF and having the turrets kill them.

Yea. And with the Devs previoustrack record with the GCW, just how long will it stay completely voluntary?

Point: I see what you mean, but looking at how hard GM is trying to make this system work for PvErs too, I think it will ALWAYS be as voluntary as possible.

e) Why do you need equal rewards when all you're doing is PvEing?

this statement has been taken slightly out of context. I tried to give a different kind of justification earlier...that it is more expensive to play PvP than PvE. I'm still waiting to see a set of PvE equipment that will cost as much as 56+ mil, just to give you the necessary extra edge.

---

---

---

Istin wrote:

CounterPoint: Go look at one of the earliest letters from the staff on the main site. One of the primary objectives of theirs was to make EVERYONE feel that they were either participating in or viewing the GCW. Crackdown tried to emphasize that.

It sure did emphisize the GCW. To the point where it forced me out of the GCW alltogether. Forcing me to Overt without any say in the matter was the FINAL straw. I guess you can see how bitter I feel on this matter.

CounterPoint: No one at all cared about the battlefields. They were like planetside rehashed, only winning at one meant nothing. They were deactivated because no one played in them and PvP was essentially non-existant there.

I disagree, The Battlefields were so buggy that no one ever did em anymore. Kinda hard to win when you were spawned right in the middle of the enemy's camp and were blasted into oblivion in an instant. The Devs trid several times to fix em, then took em out altogether, saying that they will return completely revamped in a future patch. Yea, right.

CounterPoint: Covert scanners are generally placed near bases, a place where you generally wouldn't go if only looking for PvE. On Shadowfire, there was an imp base with turrets and a scanner placed too near a rebel's house. A CSR made the imps move the scanner so the person could get in the house without taking a TEF and having the turrets kill them.

Yet, the Devs basically turned Probe Droids ans ST's into Covert Detectors. They turned em into even worse. A CD will merely give you a TEF you can wait out. If your searched, and find your sliced items, they turn you OVERT. And there is no way to avoid it.

---

---

---

---

DND_Cas wrote:

Thats not the point here.

The point is that to be the best smuggler you have to be a pvp smuggler. That is wrong.

---

Message Edited by snuggler on 07-11-2004 11:59 PM

---

HOTDOG wrote:

---

DND_Cas wrote:

Thats not the point here.

The point is that to be the best smuggler you have to be a pvp smuggler. That is wrong.

---

How is that?

---

---

DND_Cas wrote:

---

HOTDOG wrote:

---

DND_Cas wrote:

Thats not the point here.

The point is that to be the best smuggler you have to be a pvp smuggler. That is wrong.

---

How is that?

---

If the rewards are greater for one playstyle over another then the playstyle with the greater rewards is the best playstyle for that profession. Not exactly rocket science that is it?

---

---

HOTDOG wrote:
You are missing the point saber-

I never said an NPC couldn't be made hard to beat. In fact I DID say "you could make an unbeatable NPC but where would the fun be in that-"

The point is an NPC is not going to tell JTGALPHA to get a slice from you and while you are slicing his weapon, come sneaking up behind you, explode a droid & spam eyeshot on you 'till you're rolling out of the cloning center.

AND no matter what kind of NPC they do send after you- even if it is randomized- it won't be long before you figure out a pattern and learn how to defeat whatever they program to come after you. In fact- I would guess about a month after the revamp you could go to a site like Allakhazam and read a guide on how to defeat the NPC BH 100% of the time.

Example: Krayt Dragons:
Back in the day people were soloing them and the DEVs said "they were not made to be solo'ed" so the amp-ed the HAM, etc, etc. Well, guess what? People have learned once again how to solo a Krayt (Go to the Swordsman forum if you want some tips).

A PC BH is unpredictable. He might me super strong and buffed to the bone. She might be a total newb. They might be crafty and do things to distract you while the sneak up on you OR they might hunt you in GROUPS. You don't know, you CAN'T know and you can NEVER read a guide to instruct you EXACTLY how to defeat them 100% of the time.

I think that is part of the fun of PvE- Figuring out how to defeat the program. Nothing wrong with that- I love it!

YES. You can program NPC to be unbeatable- you can program them to come in WAVES of unbeatablity. BUT YOU CANNOT PROGRAM A MACHINE TO THINK, ADAPT, DECIEVE AND OVERCOME BETTER THAN A HUMAN BEING.

Thus- PvP is Harder to overcome than PvE- why would the DEVs waste time trying to do it when they have PC Bounty Hunters who want to hunt and PC smugglers who want to be hunted?

That is content that writes itself every day.

And I NEVER said PvP is better than PvE because that's not true. They equal in a LOT of ways but PvP by it's nature is harder to overcome.

If you still don't believe me think about this:

Take 2 characters and give them the exact same attributes and abilites. Give them the same guns and armor. Make them twins in every way and give them the same Mark.

Now allow a player to play one and program the other.

9 times out of 10, who do you think is going to kill the Mark? Honestly.

Message Edited by HOTDOG on 07-08-200408:42 PM

Message Edited by HOTDOG on 07-08-200408:43 PM

---

While I love the idea of BH after Smugglers in PvP, I see a problem. There are now BH/Commandos that fight jedi. There is no way a Smuggler can fight that. That in itself is not a problem. Feign Death and wait for the BH to go away. The savey BH will learn that they need to get the drop on the smuggler before he can Feigh Death.

But what if the BH camps your body? What if the BH thinks that Feign Death is cheeze and decides the pound on the Smuggler to ruinhis armor (seen it done in PvP)? What ifall BH in general begin to think it's just not worth the effort to hunt smugglers because of Feign Death?

The smuggler is at a disadvantage to start with.The BH knows that he's going out to get a bounty so they will be buffed. The smuggler on the other hand has no idea when to expect an attack.

No. I am not saying get rid of Feign Death. I'm not saying that smugglers should be combat monsters. But smugglers are sneaky and hey...

The smuggler thinking to his self as he's slicing weapons and armor for a client. "Hmmmm, I'm slicing this weapon here that very well may be sold and make it into the hands of a BH hunting my butt. So why don't I add a little bit of insurance? A little hidden off switch that will neutralize the weapon that will activate if exposed to a certain frequency...... And this armor, layer in a small explosive charge in the helmet? hehe.. naw, probably be detected by a explosives detector. How about glue in the joint lub? hehe... yeah, make it so thay can't move....same micro switch to rupture a small packet of super-glue....."