Play Now Login Create Account
illyriad
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Devs: In my opinion it is time to add opt-in PVP
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Devs: In my opinion it is time to add opt-in PVP
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 5678>
Author
  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Snagglepuss View Drop Down
Greenhorn
Greenhorn
Avatar

Joined: 22 Oct 2016
Location: Serengeti, Afri
Status: Offline
Points: 53 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Snagglepuss Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Jul 2021 at 13:44
Here's the thing I see after reading this thread

Not one place in here is there a single mention of the behavior of NON PVP ALLIANCES??

Why is it all piled on to the PVP alliances? Why do we have to act a certain way, or talk a certain way, or limit our game to your discretions? Or, if we don't act to your standards...be made to constantly feel we aren't a real part of the meta-game and are in fact "destroying the game"??

How about the Non-PVP alliances acting properly??
IF you don't like PVP act like SkB or ITG, both of which make it clear they won't be pushed around, and protect all their members properly, by not acting out vs PvP alliances unless provoked. This cannot be said for all of the major Non-PVP alliances, some of which try and use their size to play on the outskirts of the PVP game stealthily and most times without notice or retaliation.

I call on the Non-PVP alliance in the game to work on this aspect of their games, and maybe the PVP alliances will leave them alone and concentrate on each other.

Stop blaming us warmongers for everything, because, despite popular opinion we are the ones buying the prestige that allows some of you to play farmville and chat. I believe they call that a symbiotic relationship, and whether you like it or not, you are already part of it.

Understand, I could smash any Non-PVP player I want to. I simply choose not to. I'm not saying I can beat any Non-PVP player I do smash, but I make a conscious choice to try and limit my play to PVP players, unless provoked.

Requesting the services of the top military alliance, to dog-pile a much smaller foe, was a bad mistake IMO. 
Back to Top
Wartow View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 20 May 2014
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 870 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote Wartow Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Jul 2021 at 15:08
Originally posted by Snagglepuss Snagglepuss wrote:

Here's the thing I see after reading this thread

Not one place in here is there a single mention of the behavior of NON PVP ALLIANCES??

Snags is clearly still recovering from free tuna Friday while waiting for his coffee to kick in.

Originally posted by Snagglepuss Snagglepuss wrote:

Why is it all piled on to the PVP alliances? Why do we have to act a certain way, or talk a certain way, or limit our game to your discretions? Or, if we don't act to your standards...be made to constantly feel we aren't a real part of the meta-game and are in fact "destroying the game"??

Show me a time when the aggressors were greeted with parades?  The cost of war and the time necessary for a war are prohibitive within the game.  This may be sufficient for people to leave the game for those who aren't all-in on the exercise.  Conflicts are most meaningful when they arise of scarcity of resources.  Tournaments and the player-driven event have a well defined end game that appear to have broader appeal that provide an incentive for participation.

Originally posted by Snagglepuss Snagglepuss wrote:

How about the Non-PVP alliances acting properly??
IF you don't like PVP act like SkB or ITG, both of which make it clear they won't be pushed around, and protect all their members properly, by not acting out vs PvP alliances unless provoked. This cannot be said for all of the major Non-PVP alliances, some of which try and use their size to play on the outskirts of the PVP game stealthily and most times without notice or retaliation.

I call on the Non-PVP alliance in the game to work on this aspect of their games, and maybe the PVP alliances will leave them alone and concentrate on each other.

I'm not sure I get the point here.  It makes sense to play around the outskirts of PvP to avoid dragging yourself or your alliance into an escalating conflict.  

Originally posted by Snagglepuss Snagglepuss wrote:

Stop blaming us warmongers for everything, because, despite popular opinion we are the ones buying the prestige that allows some of you to play farmville and chat. I believe they call that a symbiotic relationship, and whether you like it or not, you are already part of it.

A prior response addresses this well.  Prestige is purchased by many for its value in gold within the game.  Someone with resources must be willing to buy prestige for it to be profitable for the seller.  Prices stay high when there is sufficient demand and an adequate supply of gold.  Within this point we find the irony of the goldfarm. 

Originally posted by Snagglepuss Snagglepuss wrote:

Understand, I could smash any Non-PVP player I want to. I simply choose not to. I'm not saying I can beat any Non-PVP player I do smash, but I make a conscious choice to try and limit my play to PVP players, unless provoked.

The spirit of Independence Day is strong with the Snaggleman.  Let freedom of choices and consequences for actions ring loudly this weekend!

Originally posted by Snagglepuss Snagglepuss wrote:

Requesting the services of the top military alliance, to dog-pile a much smaller foe, was a bad mistake IMO.

This sounds juicy.  Did I miss something while I was busy with my diplos and poaching activities?
Back to Top
eowan the short View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 03 Jan 2016
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 937 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote eowan the short Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Jul 2021 at 00:20
Snaggle, Wartow makes most of the points I would have made, but I feel that more emphasis could have been placed on the fact that pvp players do not fund this game exclusively.

Here's my thoughts on the role of pvp vs non pvp on prestige purchases, from a separate forum thread:

The largest consumers of prestige in the game are probably the builders, such as Thirion, dittobite, and Quentin The Miffed, who use vast amounts of prestige to get their population high enough for their next towns. I've seen the figure of 900 prestige used as an estimate to fully build a town, therefore it would take around 54,000 prestige to rebuild a 60 town account after the final pop push. Using this amount of prestige will either require the builders to be pvp purchasers themselves, or to significantly increase demand for prestige. Increasing demand increases prices, which in turn incentivises people to purchase more prestige. 

As for whether the rest of the non-pvp sector purchases a significant amount of prestige, I would say with the seasonal tournaments, the use of prestige to fund the regular creation and mass kill off of troops is going to become more and more common place. The tournament's shifting the consumption habits of non-pvpers towards that of the pvpers means that their presence in prestige markets is no longer without substitutes.

You and your coalition are not necessary.
This is the thread that never ends, yes it goes on and on my friend. Some person started it, not knowing what it was, and we'll continue posting on it forever just because...
Back to Top
Snagglepuss View Drop Down
Greenhorn
Greenhorn
Avatar

Joined: 22 Oct 2016
Location: Serengeti, Afri
Status: Offline
Points: 53 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Snagglepuss Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Jul 2021 at 10:51
Then, in your own words, no coalitions are necessary… We should all just quit?? Eowan is just jealous, with an obvious axe to grind against someone who made his own meta game, that will last a lifetime 😎 Both of you just proved my point, TY 
Back to Top
Fanuidhol View Drop Down
Greenhorn
Greenhorn
Avatar

Joined: 29 Jan 2017
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 95 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (2) Thanks(2)   Quote Fanuidhol Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Jul 2021 at 11:20
Free Danger Russ! Beer
Back to Top
Wartow View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 20 May 2014
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 870 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Wartow Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Jul 2021 at 15:20
Originally posted by Fanuidhol Fanuidhol wrote:

Free Danger Russ! Beer

All of Illy shares the same thoughts on this Independence Day -> No.
Back to Top
eowan the short View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 03 Jan 2016
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 937 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote eowan the short Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Jul 2021 at 18:34
Originally posted by Snagglepuss Snagglepuss wrote:

Then, in your own words, no coalitions are necessary… We should all just quit??

Yes, you should quit if you are such an egomaniac that the idea of a game not entirely revolving around you is too much to handle.
This is the thread that never ends, yes it goes on and on my friend. Some person started it, not knowing what it was, and we'll continue posting on it forever just because...
Back to Top
Snagglepuss View Drop Down
Greenhorn
Greenhorn
Avatar

Joined: 22 Oct 2016
Location: Serengeti, Afri
Status: Offline
Points: 53 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Snagglepuss Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Jul 2021 at 21:25
Then Eowan, I guess I won’t quit because, sadly for your ego, the game does revolve around me. I am pretty sure it’s your lack of understanding this and your own inadequacy that leads you to wish you were me…. It’s a vain effort, But you can keep trying 🙃
Back to Top
eowan the short View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 03 Jan 2016
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 937 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote eowan the short Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Jul 2021 at 22:05
lol
This is the thread that never ends, yes it goes on and on my friend. Some person started it, not knowing what it was, and we'll continue posting on it forever just because...
Back to Top
Angrim View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar

Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Location: Laoshin
Status: Offline
Points: 1173 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Angrim Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 Jul 2021 at 04:58
the problem with the OP is that this has already been floated and DEVS found opt-in pvp unworkable. players who have been here long enough will remember that the original Broken Lands design was to have split the new continent into pvp and non-pvp zones, but allowing players to reside in a non-pvp zone but still build armies and otherwise participate in the game led to a myriad of possible exploits and issues. if those issues were solvable at all (which i rather doubt), at least they required an effort which ultimately was more than DEVS felt the game justified. somewhere there is a thread on it, but imagine for a moment the sort of bad behavior one might get up to if a player need have no fear of a military response. even non-pvp players benefit from an environment in which military action is a conceivable outcome.

i rather like (and have always liked) the idea of hiring added muscle from local factions, just because it adds a bit of depth and gives the factions something meaningful to do. but here irl, it is apparent DEVS have little interest in new illyriad projects, so i doubt it will come to much more than a thought experiment.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 5678>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.03
Copyright ©2001-2019 Web Wiz Ltd.