ivanhedgehog Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 You're suggesting one person is representative of an entire group of players. More sweeping generalizations. the worst member of any group represents that group. It is a fact of life. the ganker represents what many people see as owpvp proponents. they see someone that is NOT interested in "good" fights. they see someone looking for easy kills and willing to do just about anything to get them. It may not be your fault( the average pvper), but that is what people see and remember. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Infernixx Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 Come on now, I know everything doesn't always go the way they plan, but this seems a bit excessively gloomy. Do you have any specific reason to believe things haven't intentionally changed since the stream? I don't assume changes happen unless I see hints of those changes being made. It's entirely possible that they're minimizing the impact of Commanders on upgrading Guild Ships, but I haven't seen anything to hint that they're doing that. If we're given new information regarding Commanders to that effect, then I'll feel better about things, but until then, I consider that sort of assumption as the worst kind of wishful thinking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoom_VI Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 Infernixx now your just being obtuse Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ivanhedgehog Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 These actually DO NOT force anyone to enter the Outlaw's Den. People just enter because they don't better I guess. Both objectives can be scanned OUTSIDE the Outlaw's Den area. you cannot buy the scanner for the hk part without entering Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Infernixx Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 Infernixx now your just being obtuse I'm being selective. I'm taking the quote of a Developer over the erratic PTS since they contradict each other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoom_VI Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 you cannot buy the scanner for the hk part without entering I've done that a bazillion times and only had to fight maybe twice ever Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoom_VI Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 I'm being selective. I'm taking the quote of a Developer over the erratic PTS since they contradict each other. Given my experience with development, its far more likely that the PTS is correct and the guy on the stream was misinformed. Remember the guys on the stream are just the PR staff they are not the actual design developers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daekarus Posted August 8, 2014 Author Share Posted August 8, 2014 the worst member of any group represents that group. It is a fact of life. the ganker represents what many people see as owpvp proponents. they see someone that is NOT interested in "good" fights. they see someone looking for easy kills and willing to do just about anything to get them. It may not be your fault( the average pvper), but that is what people see and remember. This is a very powerful truth. It's why I always try to encourage motorcycle riders to ride responsibly when on public roads and other firearms owners to practice safe handling and shooting. People don't remember the elderly gentleman on the sport tourer with a stock exhaust pipe, they remember the young squid that goes roaring by on his overpowered sportbike or cruiser that leaves an echoing exhaust note for half a mile. People don't remember the woman who defends the life of her children or the competition target shooter who patiently reloads each case and tears tiny holes in paper, they remember the nut job who shoots up a classroom or the guy who shoots himself in the leg because he didn't clear his pistol before cleaning. We are all representatives of the subgroups to which we belong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ivanhedgehog Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 I've done that a bazillion times and only had to fight maybe twice ever same here, just saying you cant get it from the door. the area is pretty much empty Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daekarus Posted August 8, 2014 Author Share Posted August 8, 2014 Given my experience with development, its far more likely that the PTS is correct and the guy on the stream was misinformed. Remember the guys on the stream are just the PR staff they are not the actual design developers. This is actually a really good point which I find comforting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Infernixx Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 This is actually a really good point which I find comforting. Musco is the PR person, Jack Wood is the Producer. Wood was the one making the statement. Until they clarify, I'll take his word over a malleable and changing PTS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord_of_Mu Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 the worst member of any group represents that group. It is a fact of life. the ganker represents what many people see as owpvp proponents. they see someone that is NOT interested in "good" fights. they see someone looking for easy kills and willing to do just about anything to get them. It may not be your fault( the average pvper), but that is what people see and remember. Basically every time the Gree event rolls around and the pvp ops groups decide to start standing on top of or inside the hit box of mobs in an attempt to flag people. Half of the western ice shelf is a pvp zone, complete with dailies, but the pvpers still have to come north to where the unflagged people are trying to complete their dailies and try to get the pvers flagged just for a quick gank. So really, with people like that representing the open world pvp community. It's hardly a surprise that a lot of people are averse to anything open world pvp related. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daekarus Posted August 8, 2014 Author Share Posted August 8, 2014 Basically every time the Gree event rolls around and the pvp ops groups decide to start standing on top of or inside the hit box of mobs in an attempt to flag people. Half of the western ice shelf is a pvp zone, complete with dailies, but the pvpers still have to come north to where the unflagged people are trying to complete their dailies and try to get the pvers flagged just for a quick gank. So really, with people like that representing the open world pvp community. It's hardly a surprise that a lot of people are averse to anything open world pvp related. This is unfortunately a great example of behavior that commonly makes a bad impression. And please remember, PvPers, it's not that people don't want you to have your fun... they just don't want to play WITH you while you do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoom_VI Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 (edited) Musco is the PR person, Jack Wood is the Producer. Wood was the one making the statement. Until they clarify, I'll take his word over a malleable and changing PTS. Dude, I am going to laugh so hard when it goes live with two items per kill. PTS > PR stunt Also you spent the entire thread talking about how bad it would be to be getting one per every member of the raid, and now you are arguing that that's how it will be? Really? Edited August 8, 2014 by Zoom_VI Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daekarus Posted August 8, 2014 Author Share Posted August 8, 2014 Also you spent the entire thread talking about how bad it would be to be getting one per every member of the raid, and now you are arguing that that's how it will be? Really? To be fair, those aren't really related nor are they mutually exclusive. It just reflects lack of faith in PTS builds and a pessimistic view of the effort to balance the various Conquest activities. Given those premises, his statement makes sense. I don't pay attention to the PTS so I really couldn't say... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoom_VI Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 I don't pay attention to the PTS so I really couldn't say... Historically the PTS builds rarely ever change going to live, the only time I ever remember any serious changes was with the 2.0 PTS, but that was mandated by how broken the 2.0 PTS build was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Infernixx Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 Dude, I am going to laugh so hard when it goes live with two items per kill. PTS > PR stunt Also you spent the entire thread talking about how bad it would be to be getting one per every member of the raid, and now you are arguing that that's how it will be? Really? I'm assuming the worst and if it changes, I'm pleasantly surprised. Do it the other way around and assume the best and you might end up angry and frustrated and pissed off when it goes live. You don't understand. If you're right, and I'm wrong, then I'm going to be happy. This Is Not A Contest To Me. If Commanders get nerfed to hell and back and I can happily ignore the ******* in the OW PVP zones and grind out my Encryptions in some other way, then yay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Infernixx Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 Historically the PTS builds rarely ever change going to live, the only time I ever remember any serious changes was with the 2.0 PTS, but that was mandated by how broken the 2.0 PTS build was. And the changes made in the last week. Of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lotharofxev Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 It just reflects lack of faith in PTS builds and a pessimistic view of the effort to balance the various Conquest activities. Given those premises, his statement makes sense. I don't pay attention to the PTS so I really couldn't say... ./facepalm What is the expression when one dismisses evidence contrary to one's worldview? Confirmation Bias? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoom_VI Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 (edited) And the changes made in the last week. Of course. those where not build changes, that was just BW delaying the gships so they get focused feedback on personal strongholds, because they predicted successfully that the uproar over gships would drown out any feedback on the normal 'holds. There is a reason the PTS is often mocked as the "preview server" Edited August 8, 2014 by Zoom_VI Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daekarus Posted August 8, 2014 Author Share Posted August 8, 2014 ./facepalm What is the expression when one dismisses evidence contrary to one's worldview? Confirmation Bias? Ummm... you really DO have reading comprehension issues. I'm sorry, I try not to insult people who actually can't help it. Please accept my apologies for my earlier statements in your direction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daekarus Posted August 8, 2014 Author Share Posted August 8, 2014 Historically the PTS builds rarely ever change going to live, the only time I ever remember any serious changes was with the 2.0 PTS, but that was mandated by how broken the 2.0 PTS build was. Well, then it makes sense why you objected. If we take that as a given, his concerns seem less urgent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LanceCorporalDan Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 It is a generalization that encapsulates the essence of many PvEr's experience with OWPvP: a higher level or PvP geared character attacks and prevents a lower level or PvE geared character from accomplishing whatever task Bioware saw fit to put in the danger zone. This is the reason why people rebel against the idea of OWPvP, because they are given no choice but to participate in a type of play they don't want if they're to achieve a significant percentage of the big side quests in the game. They don't want to PvP, they want to achieve the PvE objective and be left alone. To a PvE player, the best visit to the Outlaw's Den is one when it is empty. They have consented to PvP by entering only by the rules of the game, not in actual fact. What PvPers interpret as complaining about being killed while flagged isn't that at all - that would be ridiculous. The complaining is about having to be flagged in the first place. It's not a complaint against PvPers that are only following the rules of the game (unless they're griefing/corpse camping), it's a complaint against the designer's choice to force anyone who wants to complete that content to engage in a playstyle that requires different skill, different equipment, and gives the advantage to the aggressor. Those who claim that it is the designers who dictate what the game is and is meant to be are right, and they rightly point out that such quest segments could properly be called PvP content. That's not in dispute. However, it is certainly the right of any player (and PvPers take full advantage of this right) to express displeasure with the current design of the game and propose changes based on what they enjoy. Those who express a wish that such quest segments were not PvP content have just as legitimate an opinion as any other player. I don't really see the necessity for all of this. It seems off topic when I was commenting on how one person's acts shouldn't be taken as factual representation of a wide group of players with varying play styles. I didn't comment on the "forced pvp". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lotharofxev Posted August 9, 2014 Share Posted August 9, 2014 Determining # 1 in any endeavor online is going to be like herding cats no matter how you approach the problem (unless a clear cut and dry like ranked PvP or who cleared NiM first and fastest). Whether the solution is PvE, PvP, a combination, or neither (crafting), somebody is going to feel "left out". I give the company props for a slightly different paradigm. And for rolling out not one, but three new items that have been asked for (and or present in other games) for some time. I may disagree with the implementation, but I can choose not to participate (buy / play). At the end of the day, no MMORPG is going to be a perfect "match" for anyone or anybody. Whether it's getting puked on, lack of new PvP zones, lack of new "content", one faction or another will feel slighted. And that's ok. You can always vote with your wallet, feet or time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daekarus Posted August 9, 2014 Author Share Posted August 9, 2014 I don't really see the necessity for all of this. It seems off topic when I was commenting on how one person's acts shouldn't be taken as factual representation of a wide group of players with varying play styles. I didn't comment on the "forced pvp". You commented with the intention of implying his assertions were invalid because they contained generalizations based on a segment of the population. I disagreed and explained why the generalization had merit regardless of its basis on a segment of the overall population. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts