If they gave reds access to Trammel

[Radun]

I love how people in this thread assume being blue means you're "innocent" (like you can't be a criminal in disguise) and how being red means your automatically a murdering scum bag (some players who are red, are red for RP purposes and actually couldn't kill a mongbat... Freja being one of them.)

You and your buddies stereotypes and connotations of a player-class are baseless, wrong, illogical, definitely naive and lastly ridiculous.

Here read this: flagging

Innocent and murderer and criminal are not terms we're just pulling out of our arses. these are the actual factual terms that the reputation system has always used, ever since it replaced the original notoriety system.

 

[Yalp]

And you think your responses have been stellar or even thought-provoking?

So sorry, but you're a nobody and your personal opinion of what the Dev team will or won't do means squat diddly doo doo.

Well Rain.. I can see we've come to the end of the line, where people of good will excuse themselves, to retire before they say or do something they will have to take back.

We will have to make yet another gentlemen's agreement that we do not agree on your idea as it is presented here. We will have to agree that we do not agree on your ideas of changing the rule set to the murder system. And we will have to agree that verbal insults and bullying do not produce productive discourse.

 

[Ash]

lol! A compromise for what? Nothing is being taken away from you... so why do you think, you deserve any kind of compensation for anything? - Logic

What is being taken away from others is the concept of justice. A concept apparently totally lost upon you.

And you think your responses have been stellar or even thought-provoking?

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahahahaahaha

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahahhahahah

So sorry, but you're a nobody and your personal opinion of what the Dev team will or won't do means squat diddly doo doo.

This is nothing but a troll feast, just close minded insults tossed around when someone didn't get the support they wanted.

D. Trolling is prohibited.Trolling is whenever someone is clearly, deliberately posting in a manner for the purpose of angering and/or insulting the other participants of the board. Trolling DOES NOT encourage further discussion in the long run, it only encourages personal attacks (if left unchecked).

Come on Mods, this thread has gone way past a discussion and needs to be nipped.

Either way, have allowed this nonsense to waste enough of my time.

 

[Radun]

This would only be true for the kind of system that doesn't have "Trammel" in it. When you are given the option to go to an area that has PvP enabled and an area that doesnt... then going to the area that does, means you are consenting to have PvP a part of your gaming experience.

If going to felucca was indication that you were consenting to fight with anyone and everyone who was there, nobody would be given the option to give a murder count. There would be no murders. There would be no murderers.
If the dev team intended for entering felucca to be consenting to fight anyone else who was there, felucca would be coded so that everyone who wasn't guilded/allied would appear orange to everyone else.

If being in fel was automatic consent to pvp with anyone/everyone, the facet's ruleset would reflect that.

Everything I've said in this post has nothing to do with the fact that you can completely avoid pvp by staying out of fel. The fact that you can avoid pvp by staying out of fel is irrelevant. Just because someone chooses to play where pvp is possible doesn't mean they've given consent to fight with anyone.

Raiding =PKing =Murdering =non-consensual pvp.
Engaging other players in non-consensual pvp is the reason why you're not allowed to leave felucca and escape player justice. (which is what you want.. to escape retribution)

 

[Crow]

So, all of you RED haters out there that feel we need to suffer for our wrong doings, what is it that reds gain by being red? Murder counts is the only thing I can think of......QUOTE]

Being red allows your feilds, energy vortexes and withers to effect blue, non guild or allied characters. Comes in handy in feild battle when your enemy uses blue characters.

But to the topic...more land and options in fel, problem solved.

 

[Surgeries]

Then I guess we'll continue to disagree. I believe your idea of non-consentual PvP differs from my own.

If, for example, they were to put a gump up when you hit a moongate going to Felucca that said something along the lines of "Once you enter Felucca, you are consenting to PvP," that would make it consentual, correct?

No...even games like Lineage have consequences for murdering "Innocents"...and the consequences are way more extreme than UO...

The way I understand it, you have to fight Monsters to regain good Karma, in Lineage, and Lineage is all "Non-Consensual" PvP. PKs have to PvM to get back their Good Karma. They don't get to sit as a ghost at a bank, while they work, from what I gather.

There is no Trammel in Lineage...but even they understand that there has to be consequences, so even in Lineage, toons become Red, and are considered Criminals.

There are really many good ways to allow people that play Red Toons in UO to come to Trammel...just not on their scrolled out, super armored Red. They would need to outfit another Toon to come to Trammel, then. Or...they would need to open a new account and try not to go red on every toon on THAT account. Then they can come all they want, as long as they don't go Red.

Or, we could just, as many others have mentioned, make ALL Pvp in UO truly consensual (with a Pop Up to accept or decline the fight) and a robust ignore feature as well, then everyone can just be...white...or something...

 

[Draxous]

Just because someone chooses to play where pvp is possible doesn't mean they've given consent to fight with anyone.

This is only true if the player does not have the choice to play where pvp is not possible.

That is why trammel is relevent. You choose (you even said it) to go to a place where PvP is possible and then you're telling me that people didn't choose to have PvP happen to them?

Like, what the hell?

I understand what you are trying to say, but you don't get what I and many man others have said at all.

If you are in a world, where PvP is possible and someone attacks you it is not consensual unless you were given the choice to be in that world... aka Trammel.


Now be gone... this is the last time I'm going to reword the same thing for the 50th time, just because you keep reposting the same thing 50 times... doesn't mean you still have a point.

 

[Radun]

Note what it says next to each color.

 

[Radun]

This is only true if the player does not have the choice to play where pvp is not possible.

No it isn't... Consenting to play where it's possible to fight, and consenting to a fight with someone, are two drastically different things. The first one is indicated by whether or not they are in the facet where it's possible to fight. the second one is indicated by whether or not they issue you a murder count, for killing them non-consensually.

 

[Dermott of LS]

...

300+ posts and we are no further than where we were when this started.

 

[Draxous]

Then I guess we'll continue to disagree. I believe your idea of non-consentual PvP differs from my own.

If, for example, they were to put a gump up when you hit a moongate going to Felucca that said something along the lines of "Once you enter Felucca, you are consenting to PvP," that would make it consentual, correct?

No...even games like Lineage have consequences for murdering "Innocents"...and the consequences are way more extreme than UO...

The way I understand it, you have to fight Monsters to regain good Karma, in Lineage, and Lineage is all "Non-Consensual" PvP. PKs have to PvM to get back their Good Karma. They don't get to sit as a ghost at a bank, while they work, from what I gather.

There is no Trammel in Lineage...but even they understand that there has to be consequences, so even in Lineage, toons become Red, and are considered Criminals.

There are really many good ways to allow people that play Red Toons in UO to come to Trammel...just not on their scrolled out, super armored Red. They would need to outfit another Toon to come to Trammel, then. Or...they would need to open a new account and try not to go red on every toon on THAT account. Then they can come all they want, as long as they don't go Red.

Or, we could just, as many others have mentioned, make ALL Pvp in UO truly consensual (with a Pop Up to accept or decline the fight) and a robust ignore feature as well, then everyone can just be...white...or something...

Read what I bolded.

That's right Surgeries... there is no "Trammel" therefore it is Non-consensual PvP. If there was no Trammel in Ultima Online, then yes... we should have consequences and severe consequences for attacking and murdering players who do not.


Since we're using other games for example... why not take a look at WoW? Isn't there battle grounds players can go to and openly PvP in? That's the same thing as Felucca... a play-pen.

Look at DAoC and Realm vs Realm warfare? DAoC is a Consensual PvP game, because for the majority... they restrict you to playing in only one realm. When you enter the frontier... you are consenting to PvP.


I really do not see how anyone here can believe a system designed when Ultima Online was like Lineage (non-consensual PvP oriented) should follow those rules when this game is now like WoW and DAoC (consensual PvP oriented.)

Keeping the blue/red thing is a must... for Siege and for keeping with the history and traditions of Ultima... but, this whole thread is dedicated to bringing the game current.

 

[Radun]

Consensual PvP never results in a murder count being issued. If like you said in the previous post was true (that UO is consensual pvp only), there would be no reds at all.

Whether a given fight is consensual or non-consensual has absolutely nothing to do with what facet you're on.

 

[Draxous]

...

300+ posts and we are no further than where we were when this started.

Not true.

We've gained much support through this and have established that the few people who care about it not coming to fruition are those this proposal won't effect.

We're also making strides at taking this game in a new direction... one with a single community, made up of many different player-types, all of which make up a fantastic game.

 

[Dermott of LS]

...

How many non-PvP players' houses are in the Battlegrounds in WoW?

Bad comparison. Had they implemented the rulesets in reverse when UO:R came out, you would have had a better comparison. As it is, Battlegrounds /= Felucca.

 

[Yalp]

Or, we could just, as many others have mentioned, make ALL Pvp in UO truly consensual (with a Pop Up to accept or decline the fight) and a robust ignore feature as well, then everyone can just be...white...or something...

let's not forget, you can still pvp in tram/tok/malas/ilsh.. which is for the most part consensual.

 

[Draxous]

...

How many non-PvP players' houses are in the Battlegrounds in WoW?

Bad comparison. Had they implemented the rulesets in reverse when UO:R came out, you would have had a better comparison. As it is, Battlegrounds /= Felucca.

Bad comparison?

It's a different game, of course it's not going to be the same. You're not jumping on Surgeries for some bad points of comparison between UO and Lineage, are you... no, because the point was made crystal clear as was with my example.

Moving on.

 

[Surgeries]

Read what I bolded.

That's right Surgeries... there is no "Trammel" therefore it is Non-consensual PvP. If there was no Trammel in Ultima Online, then yes... we should have consequences and severe consequences for attacking and murdering players who do not.


Since we're using other games for example... why not take a look at WoW? Isn't there battle grounds players can go to and openly PvP in? That's the same thing as Felucca... a play-pen.

Look at DAoC and Realm vs Realm warfare? DAoC is a Consensual PvP game, because for the majority... they restrict you to playing in only one realm. When you enter the frontier... you are consenting to PvP.


I really do not see how anyone here can believe a system designed when Ultima Online was like Lineage (non-consensual PvP oriented) should follow those rules when this game is now like WoW and DAoC (consensual PvP oriented.)

Keeping the blue/red thing is a must... for Siege and for keeping with the history and traditions of Ultima... but, this whole thread is dedicated to bringing the game current.

By your logic, when a person goes to Fel...it is Consensual PvP.

When a person logs into Lineage...it IS consensual then, and there should be no consequences for killing others....

There IS no Trammel, in Fel. But I can GO to Trammel, from Fel.

There IS no Trammel in Lineage, but I can log out of Lineage, and go play UO in Trammel, or WoW, or any other game that does not allow a character to kill my character, unless I choose it.

Your logic is flawed at best.

And certainly not worth debating, as debate can only be had when cogent points are presented on both sides.

Your points are skewed and self serving, which then, precludes cogent.

Sorry. No more debate for you.

But keep on trying to hide the intent of your posts...the only persons fooled by it are those that choose to be, or stand to benefit from their own agendas being furthered by it.

We will call it Consensual Kidding Yourselves.

But hey.

Maybe you make another 8,000,000,000,000,000 posts telling everyone how right you are, and how wrong people like me are, and then the Devs will finally wise up to how brilliant your idea is, and how much better the game will be as a result.

Or not.

My bet is on the "Or Not".

Time will tell.

It sure has so far...

 

[Yalp]

Keeping the blue/red thing is a must... for Siege and for keeping with the history and traditions of Ultima... but, this whole thread is dedicated to bringing the game current.

Wait.. Keeping UO's traditions? Or making the game current?

 

[Radun]

psst... the game already is 'current'. he's just trolling

 

[Yalp]

psst... the game already is 'current'. he's just trolling

 

[Surgeries]

Black Rain? A Troll??

No WAY!!

That's a personal attack!!

Shame on you.

Plus...he's right, and everyone that doesn't agree with him is just...well...wrong.

I hate to be the one that has to break to you all...but just ask him.

He'll tell ya.

No wait...please don't.

*Smiles*

 

[THP]

I'm not, I want tracking unnerfed so we can kill you
It's spellet Felucca

LOL ''spelllings'' how f*ck lame are we!!!

Come find me in Fel.. i even stealth into reds peeps houses while they are inside there taking the pee!!

QUITE HAPPY how we are thankyou very much....

 

[THP]

Has far AS i can read there are maybe 4-5 kids wanting to rip trammel apart with there red sammy/archer....LOL [end]

 

[o2bavr6]

And now we see what it is to PvP through your eyes, not the victory of a worthwhile opponent but the chasing and killing of the helpless.

In case you misinterpreted, the 2 reds came in to kill the 11 blues not with them. And actually in this case we were in Covetous Liche Lord room and I happened to be the 11th blue who stayed and faught instead of recalling out

Not dumb at all since this addressed quite a while ago when arcane demons were placed in the Palace of Paroxymous.

Good to know

 

[FrejaSP]

In case you misinterpreted, the 2 reds came in to kill the 11 blues not with them. And actually in this case we were in Covetous Liche Lord room and I happened to be the 11th blue who stayed and faught instead of recalling out

But in most cases, this 11 blue, who do did have the skills to kill Lich Lords would act like chickens when they see a fox.

They would not join up against the 2 reds, they would recall out if they could recall, else they would run to a corner and hide and left would a few who would freeze up and just give up and die.

I remember once I saw 3 from same guild in the forest, when I show up, two recalled out, left was a younger guildmember who could not recall. He was shocked to see the ones who took him on hunts and was protecting him from getting ganked of monsters, leaving him to die when I show up. I feeled so sorry for him, so I did let him live.

 

[Yalp]

But in most cases, this 11 blue, who do did have the skills to kill Lich Lords would act like chickens when they see a fox.

They would not join up against the 2 reds, they would recall out if they could recall, else they would run to a corner and hide and left would a few who would freeze up and just give up and die.

I remember once I saw 3 from same guild in the forest, when I show up, two recalled out, left was a younger guildmember who could not recall. He was shocked to see the ones who took him on hunts and was protecting him from getting ganked of monsters, leaving him to die when I show up. I feeled so sorry for him, so I did let him live.

maybe they had items in their packs they spent alot of their play time acquiring and didn't want to risk loosing in a battle? Maybe their template, armor and skills were set up to engage monsters and they knew they didn't have the gear to take on a red? Maybe they did have the armor and template set to pvp, but don't have any speedhacks and cheat programs guaranteeing their defeat? Maybe they were training up some new skills and were already pushed to the edge of their abilities and taking on someone designed to kill them would have been overload? maybe they thought they could go 2 v 1, but wondered if the rest of the gank squad was right behind you. Maybe they didn't have enough gold in their bankbox to auto insure and didnt want to risk the crimmy they just spent their last gold check on.

just a thought.....

 

[Draxous]

OMG Check out Radums thread about consensual PvP!!!

By a 2 to 1 margin, people agree that going to Felucca means you've consented to PvP in your Ultima Online gaming experience.


Woot Woot!!!


And Surgeries... I love the "My points got smashed, so I'll change the argument to be about the poster and not the discussion at hand." Your logic is flawed, stop incorporating so much ethos into it.

 

[o2bavr6]

maybe they had items in their packs they spent alot of their play time acquiring and didn't want to risk loosing in a battle? Maybe their template, armor and skills were set up to engage monsters and they knew they didn't have the gear to take on a red? Maybe they did have the armor and template set to pvp, but don't have any speedhacks and cheat programs guaranteeing their defeat? Maybe they were training up some new skills and were already pushed to the edge of their abilities and taking on someone designed to kill them would have been overload? maybe they thought they could go 2 v 1, but wondered if the rest of the gank squad was right behind you. Maybe they didn't have enough gold in their bankbox to auto insure and didnt want to risk the crimmy they just spent their last gold check on.

just a thought.....

Actually back then armor was all gm made so replacign it was easy and ther was no insurance. Weapons on the other hand could have been decent like Force or Power or Vanq but most people pvped with GM or force or power weapons.

It is possible that they may have thought more would come but that was not the usual way things went down. It was usualy just 2 or 3 reds that would go hunt blues.

At the time there were no speedhacks but there was UOExtreme and UOAssist. UOE is gone now but all it did was let you last target with spells, arm and disarm, and a few other goodies, but it was alot like UOAssist.

The likelyhood was that they were just scared so they recalled, kinda sad, but its most likely the truth.

I never understood why everyone wouldnt just stay and fight, except for that gold was really hard to come by and restocking was a pain.

Most blues had a crafter of sme type to earn gold and a warrior/mage to kill monsters for gold and weapons.

Some decent reds made a living off of pking only but that was really hard because all you had to do was loose connection once (which happened a lot in the early days) when you lost conn youusualy died which resulted in stat loss.

 

[Surgeries]

OMG Check out Radums thread about consensual PvP!!!

By a 2 to 1 margin, people agree that going to Felucca means you've consented to PvP in your Ultima Online gaming experience.


Woot Woot!!!


And Surgeries... I love the "My points got smashed, so I'll change the argument to be about the poster and not the discussion at hand." Your logic is flawed, stop incorporating so much ethos into it.

I am glad so many that want to call PvP in Fel "Cosensual", that are known PvPers, and PKs, did so. It gives you a little something to hang your hat on.

Good for you!!

YAY FOR BLACK RAIN!!

He has 9 whole people that agree with him (or 11, 0r 15, whatever inconsequential number there are).

Would I have expected any less?

No. Not for a second.

These are the same posters that all want "Old School" leg humping thieves brought back, as a "Majority" of the people polled.

Go figure.

A shallow "Victory" if you want to call it that.

But, I will concede that more Stratics Posters that replied to that poll, agree that "Consensual" PvP means that when you know there can be PvP, that that is Consensual.

That makes every game that tells you that there will be PvP "Consensual", by those terms, which, then, negates YOUR point that it is Trammel that makes Fel "Consensual PvP", as in Lineage, there is no Trammel, but they DO tell you, clearly, on the website, and on the game box, I am sure, that there will be PvP.

So...then...anytime any game tells you there is PvP, and you log into that game, it is "Consensual" PvP, because you knew it, going in, that there would be PvP, so then...all PvP is "Consensual", as long as you know it will be a part of the game.

But...that can't be, because unless there are servers in the game that do not allow PvP (and not just areas...servers, or complete separate areas, outside of the server that allows PvP), like Trammel, according to you, then it is "Non-Consensual".

See the quandary?

No...of course you don't.

It's OK...we are all used to it.

It can't be both Consensual (Knowing there will be PvP makes it all Consensual), and Non-Consensual (Only if there is another area to go to, away from the main servers, where I can play without fear of being attacked, unless I choose it)...sooooo...
If it can't be both...and knowing that there will be PvP makes it consensual...then your argument you posted earlier about Lineage being Non-Consensual, because there is no Trammel, must be false.

Welcome to Logic 101.

We will have to hold you back from graduating, based on this, however.

Better luck next year.

EDIT:

Turns out that to fight another player in Lneage, now, you must be on a PvP server.

It gets better.

In "Safety Zones" now, even on the PvP servers... LOL...you can't even attack another player...at least that is what it says in the Game Manual.

I guess they learned their lesson, even in Lineage.

I like what happens to Evil/Chaotic players in Lineage, too...they drop more stuff if they die.

Too bad UO doesn't have their Red players drop more stuff than blue players do.

Maybe we would have millions of subscribers, too.

*Chuckles*

No, Black Rain...any points you think you had holding up games like Lineage being super popular because they allow free for all Non-Consensual PvP just went Pffffffft.

Totally.

*Still Laughing*

 

[Sir_Drunkenmasta]

theres an arc for u something happens to the moongates and reds get thru to tramm... would be a really good fun time....

 

[Draxous]

OMG Check out Radums thread about consensual PvP!!!

By a 2 to 1 margin, people agree that going to Felucca means you've consented to PvP in your Ultima Online gaming experience.


Woot Woot!!!


And Surgeries... I love the "My points got smashed, so I'll change the argument to be about the poster and not the discussion at hand." Your logic is flawed, stop incorporating so much ethos into it.

I am glad so many that want to call PvP in Fel "Cosensual", that are known PvPers, and PKs, did so. It gives you a little something to hang your hat on.

Good for you!!

YAY FOR BLACK RAIN!!

He has 9 whole people that agree with him (or 11, 0r 15, whatever inconsequential number there are).

Would I have expected any less?

No. Not for a second.

These are the same posters that all want "Old School" leg humping thieves brought back, as a "Majority" of the people polled.

Go figure.

A shallow "Victory" if you want to call it that.

But, I will concede that more Stratics Posters that replied to that poll, agree that "Consensual" PvP means that when you know there can be PvP, that that is Consensual.

That makes every game that tells you that there will be PvP "Consensual", by those terms, which, then, negates YOUR point that it is Trammel that makes Fel "Consensual PvP", as in Lineage, there is no Trammel, but they DO tell you, clearly, on the website, and on the game box, I am sure, that there will be PvP.

So...then...anytime any game tells you there is PvP, and you log into that game, it is "Consensual" PvP, because you knew it, going in, that there would be PvP, so then...all PvP is "Consensual", as long as you know it will be a part of the game.

But...that can't be, because unless there are servers in the game that do not allow PvP (and not just areas...servers, or complete separate areas, outside of the server that allows PvP), like Trammel, according to you, then it is "Non-Consensual".

See the quandary?

No...of course you don't.

It's OK...we are all used to it.

It can't be both Consensual (Knowing there will be PvP makes it all Consensual), and Non-Consensual (Only if there is another area to go to, away from the main servers, where I can play without fear of being attacked, unless I choose it)...sooooo...
If it can't be both...and knowing that there will be PvP makes it consensual...then your argument you posted earlier about Lineage being Non-Consensual, because there is no Trammel, must be false.

Welcome to Logic 101.

We will have to hold you back from graduating, based on this, however.

Better luck next year.

EDIT:

Turns out that to fight another player in Lneage, now, you must be on a PvP server.

It gets better.

In "Safety Zones" now, even on the PvP servers... LOL...you can't even attack another player...at least that is what it says in the Game Manual.

I guess they learned their lesson, even in Lineage.

I like what happens to Evil/Chaotic players in Lineage, too...they drop more stuff if they die.

Too bad UO doesn't have their Red players drop more stuff than blue players do.

Maybe we would have millions of subscribers, too.

*Chuckles*

No, Black Rain...any points you think you had holding up games like Lineage being super popular because they allow free for all Non-Consensual PvP just went Pffffffft.

Totally.

*Still Laughing*

STORYTIME!!!

*falls out of chair laughing*

Oh come on Surgeries... your emotional er... logical? responses to this thread have been, enlightening to say the least.

Cry more about how good of an idea this proposal was? Love my style a lil less.... mmm k?


EDIT:

 

[Surgeries]

STORYTIME!!!

*falls out of chair laughing*

Oh come on Surgeries... your emotional er... logical? responses to this thread have been, enlightening to say the least.

Cry more about how good of an idea this proposal was? Love my style a lil less.... mmm k?


EDIT:

Nothing emotional about pure logic...everything emotional, and no logic involved, with your "Story".

But again...I'll sit here and be entertained as you "Lead the game in a new, fantastic direction".

Go for it, there, Spunky.

8 Years...no wait...almost 9 years...and counting.

Keep it coming!!

 

[Omnius]

One of the things that truly makes me shake my head in puzzlement.. you so freely and righteously insult trammel....

Getting on your tamer isn't the ONLY choice you have.. you could choose to have more than 1 blue character.. but you've chosen to have many reds..

Under your world, I have to either be a bad guildy and narrowly focused pvper for 1 scene of pvp or I can pvp and be a good asset to my friends, guild and community.

Spectacular, thanks for clearing up all of this for us.

 

[Draxous]

In his world... going to Felucca means that you are consenting to PvP possibly happening to you... unless it actually does, then you never really consented to it... you just er... I'm lost.

In his world, things don't make much sense.

 

[Omnius]

By your logic, when a person goes to Fel...it is Consensual PvP.

When a person logs into Lineage...it IS consensual then, and there should be no consequences for killing others....

There IS no Trammel, in Fel. But I can GO to Trammel, from Fel.

There IS no Trammel in Lineage, but I can log out of Lineage, and go play UO in Trammel, or WoW, or any other game that does not allow a character to kill my character, unless I choose it.

Your logic is flawed at best.

And certainly not worth debating, as debate can only be had when cogent points are presented on both sides.

Your points are skewed and self serving, which then, precludes cogent.

Sorry. No more debate for you.

But keep on trying to hide the intent of your posts...the only persons fooled by it are those that choose to be, or stand to benefit from their own agendas being furthered by it.

We will call it Consensual Kidding Yourselves.

But hey.

Maybe you make another 8,000,000,000,000,000 posts telling everyone how right you are, and how wrong people like me are, and then the Devs will finally wise up to how brilliant your idea is, and how much better the game will be as a result.

Or not.

My bet is on the "Or Not".

Time will tell.

It sure has so far...

Your entire argument is flawed. The premise of it is that felucca is 100% of UO as lineage is 100% of lineage. felucca is 1 large aspect of UO but not all of it. The connection is that in UO you can easily choose never to pvp thus there is no reason to claim there is non-consentual pvp when there are endless chances for you to not pvp. In lineage you can't make that choice.

Your entire argument fell upon that fallacy. If the facts of your argument were correct then your argument may well have been correct as well but the most important facts of your case were simply wrong.


UO has a consent to pvp button. It's when you step into the red moongate, recall off the specially colored rune or click the pvp facet on the moongate. It's really just that simple. Theres no nuances or subtleties just a cut and dry case that punishing pvp is blatantly outdated and the laugh that is the virtues and principles are no longer important as there is no choice to the virtues in trammel. It's abide by them well or well there is no or. Virtues require the ability to choice a vice instead. So any argument claiming that the virtue lore is pertinant is plainly wrong because there are no vices in trammel just restrictive systems and game mechanics disguised as virtues.

Why should players be punished then for engaging in their own system of law and order in felucca? Ultimately what we see in fel is no different than an all out war for supremacy for the resources of the land. It's not some lame pre-fabricated system but a true and complete war. By joining a guild you are choosing a side, taking up arms for the code and call of your countrymen. By standing alone you are denouncing the evils of all others and embracing a system that is all your own.

The sooner folks in trammel learn to ignore things that have no effect on them, the sooner they may find that pvpers are simply engaging in a whole 'nother aspect of the game that has depth and grants players the chance to alter the landscape of the game. there is no pretend in felucca, there is a system in place to allow players the freedom to choose their actions and a system that nurtures their own individual vision of what the realm is to them. PvPers are merely asking that they not be penalized for the aspect of the game that they enjoy most.

 

[Ash]

PvPers are merely asking that they not be penalized for the aspect of the game that they enjoy most.

Which would be fine if not for the blues that are killed that don't want to PvP, but go to Fel for the scrolls that can't be obtained in any other land. If they removed the incentive to go there for people that don't want to PvP then you would have a valid point.

As there are just as many non-PvPers that don't want to be penalized from obtaining power scrolls because they don't want or able to PvP.

 

[Surgeries]

Your entire argument is flawed. The premise of it is that felucca is 100% of UO as lineage is 100% of lineage. felucca is 1 large aspect of UO but not all of it. The connection is that in UO you can easily choose never to pvp thus there is no reason to claim there is non-consentual pvp when there are endless chances for you to not pvp. In lineage you can't make that choice.

Your entire argument fell upon that fallacy. If the facts of your argument were correct then your argument may well have been correct as well but the most important facts of your case were simply wrong.


UO has a consent to pvp button. It's when you step into the red moongate, recall off the specially colored rune or click the pvp facet on the moongate. It's really just that simple. Theres no nuances or subtleties just a cut and dry case that punishing pvp is blatantly outdated and the laugh that is the virtues and principles are no longer important as there is no choice to the virtues in trammel. It's abide by them well or well there is no or. Virtues require the ability to choice a vice instead. So any argument claiming that the virtue lore is pertinant is plainly wrong because there are no vices in trammel just restrictive systems and game mechanics disguised as virtues.

Why should players be punished then for engaging in their own system of law and order in felucca? Ultimately what we see in fel is no different than an all out war for supremacy for the resources of the land. It's not some lame pre-fabricated system but a true and complete war. By joining a guild you are choosing a side, taking up arms for the code and call of your countrymen. By standing alone you are denouncing the evils of all others and embracing a system that is all your own.

The sooner folks in trammel learn to ignore things that have no effect on them, the sooner they may find that pvpers are simply engaging in a whole 'nother aspect of the game that has depth and grants players the chance to alter the landscape of the game. there is no pretend in felucca, there is a system in place to allow players the freedom to choose their actions and a system that nurtures their own individual vision of what the realm is to them. PvPers are merely asking that they not be penalized for the aspect of the game that they enjoy most.

In lineage there is no choice?

Really?

Then what about this quote, right from the Players Guide, on the Lineage Webwsite?

Player versus Player Combat

Player versus Player (PvP) combat is only available on PvP servers. Depardieu and Lands of Aden are currently PvP servers. What this means is that, if you are playing on a PvP server, you may challenge any other player without turning temporarily chaotic or receiving chaotic alignment points as long as you are in a combat zone. (Turning temporarily chaotic, also called �turning pink,� opens you to attack from any other player without repercussion.) The lower right part of the game window will indicate what zone you are in. There are three zones: safety, normal, and combat.

In safety zones, nothing will happen if you attack another player. They will not incur damage and you will not �turn pink� (temporarily chaotic).

In normal zones, you will turn pink if you attack another player. This enables any other player to attack you without fear that they will turn pink too. If you kill a player in a normal zone, you will lose alignment points. The player who died will lose experience points and may lose item(s).

In combat zones, you may hit another player � and even kill them � without turning pink or losing alignment points. The player who dies does not lose experience or items. However, both players must be inside a combat zone until the battle�s completion.

You will find various combat zones all over Aden. Some are fenced training grounds (dueling arenas); some are doorways or bridge crossings. Keep an eye on the lower right of the game window to identify what is a combat zone and what isn�t. Other places that PvP combat is acceptable: during sieges and certain deathmatch competitions.

New player zones (Singing Island and Hidden Valley) are made up of hunting grounds that are also safety zones. Forgotten Island is a hunting ground that is one large combat zone.

How about that?

"Only on PvP SERVERS.*

Got that, Omnius? ONLY ON PvP SERVERS

No Choice? In Lineage a person can't "Make That Choice"? Hmmm...

I think YOU are mistaken.

You can choose never to PvP in Lineage, too, it would seem. Unless they only have two servers.

Unless their Player Guide at

http://www.lineage.com/guide/gp_combat.html

Is out of date.

There are two PvP Servers. Altogether...those are the only two places you CAN PvP, Omnius. The others aren't PvP servers, one would have to assume, then, yes Omnius?

Explain that, please, Omnius. Go read the Play Guide

Then tell me my Logic is Failed...mmmkay?

And before you stuff both of your feet into your mouth in front of all these fine posters...please let me pop up some Popcorn.

I love a good show.

 

[Radun]

Your entire argument is flawed. The premise of it is that felucca is 100% of UO as lineage is 100% of lineage. felucca is 1 large aspect of UO but not all of it. The connection is that in UO you can easily choose never to pvp thus there is no reason to claim there is non-consentual pvp when there are endless chances for you to not pvp. In lineage you can't make that choice.

Your entire argument fell upon that fallacy. If the facts of your argument were correct then your argument may well have been correct as well but the most important facts of your case were simply wrong.


UO has a consent to pvp button. It's when you step into the red moongate, recall off the specially colored rune or click the pvp facet on the moongate. It's really just that simple. Theres no nuances or subtleties just a cut and dry case that punishing pvp is blatantly outdated and the laugh that is the virtues and principles are no longer important as there is no choice to the virtues in trammel. It's abide by them well or well there is no or. Virtues require the ability to choice a vice instead. So any argument claiming that the virtue lore is pertinant is plainly wrong because there are no vices in trammel just restrictive systems and game mechanics disguised as virtues.

Why should players be punished then for engaging in their own system of law and order in felucca? Ultimately what we see in fel is no different than an all out war for supremacy for the resources of the land. It's not some lame pre-fabricated system but a true and complete war. By joining a guild you are choosing a side, taking up arms for the code and call of your countrymen. By standing alone you are denouncing the evils of all others and embracing a system that is all your own.

The sooner folks in trammel learn to ignore things that have no effect on them, the sooner they may find that pvpers are simply engaging in a whole 'nother aspect of the game that has depth and grants players the chance to alter the landscape of the game. there is no pretend in felucca, there is a system in place to allow players the freedom to choose their actions and a system that nurtures their own individual vision of what the realm is to them. PvPers are merely asking that they not be penalized for the aspect of the game that they enjoy most.

In lineage there is no choice?

Really?

Then what about this quote, right from the Players Guide, on the Lineage Webwsite?

Player versus Player Combat

Player versus Player (PvP) combat is only available on PvP servers. Depardieu and Lands of Aden are currently PvP servers. What this means is that, if you are playing on a PvP server, you may challenge any other player without turning temporarily chaotic or receiving chaotic alignment points as long as you are in a combat zone. (Turning temporarily chaotic, also called �turning pink,� opens you to attack from any other player without repercussion.) The lower right part of the game window will indicate what zone you are in. There are three zones: safety, normal, and combat.

In safety zones, nothing will happen if you attack another player. They will not incur damage and you will not �turn pink� (temporarily chaotic).

In normal zones, you will turn pink if you attack another player. This enables any other player to attack you without fear that they will turn pink too. If you kill a player in a normal zone, you will lose alignment points. The player who died will lose experience points and may lose item(s).

In combat zones, you may hit another player � and even kill them � without turning pink or losing alignment points. The player who dies does not lose experience or items. However, both players must be inside a combat zone until the battle�s completion.

You will find various combat zones all over Aden. Some are fenced training grounds (dueling arenas); some are doorways or bridge crossings. Keep an eye on the lower right of the game window to identify what is a combat zone and what isn�t. Other places that PvP combat is acceptable: during sieges and certain deathmatch competitions.

New player zones (Singing Island and Hidden Valley) are made up of hunting grounds that are also safety zones. Forgotten Island is a hunting ground that is one large combat zone.

How about that?

"Only on PvP SERVERS.*

Got that, Omnius? ONLY ON PvP SERVERS

No Choice? In Lineage a person can't "Make That Choice"? Hmmm...

I think YOU are mistaken.

You can choose never to PvP in Lineage, too, it would seem. Unless they only have two servers.

Unless their Player Guide at

http://www.lineage.com/guide/gp_combat.html

Is out of date.

There are two PvP Servers. Altogether...those are the only two places you CAN PvP, Omnius. The others aren't PvP servers, one would have to assume, then, yes Omnius?

Explain that, please, Omnius. Go read the Play Guide

Then tell me my Logic is Failed...mmmkay?

And before you stuff both of your feet into your mouth in front of all these fine posters...please let me pop up some Popcorn.

I love a good show.

 

[Stanton Of Pac]

Reds were banned from Trammel because they'd just hang out there between raids and there'd be "no consequences" to murdering other players.

I disagreed with creating Trammel as a "safe haven" because it wasn't necessary: OSI could have installed a PvP switch on any day of the week ending in a "y" and been done with the problem. They wasted way too many resources to cater to the needs of 5% of the population IMHO. The statistic they came up with toward the end was that for every Red they kept they lost 20 other players, tired of being attacked and griefed the minute they stepped out of the guard zone.

I thought my solution would have been a little more creative: buried down in the code is a line that says players take half the damage monsters do. OSI put that in back in 1997 because players were getting slaughtered by low-level mobs and they couldn't figure how to balance combat other than that. Well, tweak that code so that NON-CRIMINAL players take half damage. Get rid of the "Red" and "Blue" designations, just make it so when you attack a fellow player and flag grey he does twice as much damage to you as you do to him. PKs would have developed a healthy respects for miners and those pickaxes they care and more would have been done for the cause of social engineering than Trammel ever accomplished.

 

[Krystal]

it always has amused me how people are so afraid to pvp or to die in a game. specially on shards that have 90% of thier stuff insured and billions in the bank. PvP is not an evil thing its makes the game more fun and exciting, instead of just fighting AI 24/7....

 

[Stigmatas]

it always has amused me how people are so afraid to pvp or to die in a game. specially on shards that have 90% of thier stuff insured and billions in the bank. PvP is not an evil thing its makes the game more fun and exciting, instead of just fighting AI 24/7....

It always amused me that die hard pvpers think that everyone should always want to fight other players. Some people just do not want to pvp just as you don't want to fight AI all the time. Learn that.

 

[Connor_Graham]

it always has amused me how people are so afraid to pvp or to die in a game.

I seriously doubt anyone is "afraid" to do anything in UO. Fear has nothing to do with why people don't PvP. PREFERENCE has everything to do with it. Some people simply don't care for UO PvP. PvM'rs aren't evil either, they just find their enjoyment in a different part of the game.

 

[Salty Pete]

it always has amused me how people are so afraid to pvp or to die in a game. specially on shards that have 90% of thier stuff insured and billions in the bank. PvP is not an evil thing its makes the game more fun and exciting, instead of just fighting AI 24/7....

Not everyone has the time, connection or is willing to subject themselves to the horrible attitudes that make up the overwhelming majority of the PvP community.

Not only that, but some people find the AI challenging enough for their level of gaming ability. Fighting players just isn't an option for someone who has trouble taking out an ettin.

I agree that PvP is not an evil thing and it can certainly be fun. It's just not for everyone.

 

[Draxous]

Reds were banned from Trammel because they'd just hang out there between raids and there'd be "no consequences" to murdering other players.

I disagreed with creating Trammel as a "safe haven" because it wasn't necessary: OSI could have installed a PvP switch on any day of the week ending in a "y" and been done with the problem.

So... currently logging on a blue and doing stuff in Trammel, hanging out in a private house or logging off... in between raids is not the same thing?

I'll only support a system that works how it's supposed to.

I will not support a system that makes people miss out on the oodles of content added to this game just because a handful of people have a misconception of what consensual PvP is or the deep brooding against a playerbase they never have to even deal with, if they chose not to.


*tips hat*

 

[Draxous]

is willing to subject themselves to the horrible attitudes that make up the overwhelming majority of the PvP community.

Your post was great until I read this... which is total crap. You can't stereotype a playerbase because it's just as easily to incorrectly do to any playerbase.

And point-blank... Trammel has jerks too... PvP community or PvPing has absolutely nothing to do with a players attitude and it makes you look petty trying to insinuate it does.

I agree that PvP is not an evil thing and it can certainly be fun. It's just not for everyone.

times 2

 

[Ash]

So... currently logging on a blue and doing stuff in Trammel, hanging out in a private house or logging off... in between raids is not the same thing?

Nope, because the penalty is on the char not the player.

I'll only support a system that works how it's supposed to.

Since it is working like it is supposed to, thanks for the support.

 

[Surgeries]

it always has amused me how people are so afraid to pvp or to die in a game. specially on shards that have 90% of thier stuff insured and billions in the bank. PvP is not an evil thing its makes the game more fun and exciting, instead of just fighting AI 24/7....

I like PvP. I am actually pretty good at it. Not great...I certainly won't go that far. And most definitely not polished and well tuned for the twitch required to be great.

But back before Trammel, when I went out in search of adventure, I had to put up with three or four toons killing my toon, and dry looting me, as I was already engaged with three or four monsters, that didn't have the attackers aggroed, and already half dead, at that.

Long before Champ Spawns, this was.

Or I would battle a single toon that attacked me first, and win. Then, I would go back to fighting monsters, and three or four would show up and "Pwn" me.

Yeah...OK...that was fun...

For them.

I would seriously consider PvP today, if I could be assured that every player I fight would have the same number of third party proggies on their machine that I do...zero. None. Not a single one.

I would consider PvP, as long when it is a duel, it stays a duel...1 V 1, and not 1 V 5. And I would enjoy, and partake in PvP if I am given a choice to fight, under the circustances previously listed.

I am not afraid of just PvP. I enjoy real PvP, that doesn't involve one side cheating, or gankage.

I just don't enjoy HPvCP or PvPPPPPPPPP

HPvCP stands for Honest Player versus Cheating Player.

You know the last one.

I will say that I also don't fault anyone that loves Fel, and all of the frontier freedoms, cheating, and bullying that it involves. I honestly don't.

I just don't enjoy it. And there is a HUGE delta between "Afraid Of", and "Don't Enjoy", that involves far more than Semantics, to be sure.

But I guess it is a bit of the vestiges of the persona of that land to call others, that don't enjoy the play style "Afraid of It". I guess it sort of makes sense, from an objective point of view. If one "Enjoys" it and does it, and others don't...they MUST be "Afraid" of it...

Doesn't make it right...just makes it understandable.

 

[D'Amavir]

So in your mind allowing Reds in Tram, as long as they had to follow the current ruleset, is not ok with you?

How would this affect your gameplay in anyway, other than when you looked at the character, instead of his color being blue it wold be red?

Its all about spite. People against reds being allowed in Tram and following Tram rules are against it just because they hate the fact that someone chose a different playstyle than them.

I don't go to Fel and I don't have a red, but I am fine with Reds being allowed in Trammel under the same trammel ruleset because, quite frankly, it doesn't affect me. I don't hold a grudge against someone based on their chosen playstyle. Unlike the anti red in trammel set. Its just silly.

As for the smacktalk issue, I find it hard to believe that all of the 'smacktalking reds' that people are talking about turn into little angels when they take their blue alts to Trammel. Again, silly.

No one has been able to explain just how allowing Reds in Trammel would impact them enough to justify this overwhelming need to squash even the conversation of it being allowed. Can anyone explain that?

 

[D'Amavir]

* scratches head*
confusion here.. we do all know there are different rule sets for tram and fel right? And we do know that reds can work off their murder count to give them access to tram land? Hmm... just wondering about personal choice and style of play and all.. odd...

Following your logic, there should not even be reds. Since Blues make a personal choice to travel to the lands that allow open pvp and those that attack blues are choosing their style of play, why even have Red as a character name color?

 

[D'Amavir]

that's not true. there's a difference between allowing yourself to be attacked, and participating in a consentual fight.


"Oh, he _chose_ to walk through the bad neighborhood on his way to school... so he was _consenting_ to being robbed and shot."

Trying to equate game facts with real life facts is the worst idea I have ever seen. Choosing to be subject to pvp upon entering Fel has nothing at all to do with real life crimes. If and when the government declares real world murder as a playstyle, then maybe you can make those comparisons. But they haven't, so you can't.

The whole concept of Reds is outdated anyway. There are just as many, if not more, Blues that pk other blues than there are Reds anyway. In my opinion, you should go Red upon your first 'murder'. Not your 5th, 6th or
7th. Either that, or get rid of the color red altogether. You don't have to have your name show up as Red to rp evil just like you don't need Glorious Lord as your title to rp good.

This way, people that pk blues could go to all the facets and the anti red set wouldn't even notice. I just don't get how they are ok with a blue that pk's them being allowed in Trammel afterwards but is so opposed to a red being allowed there.