If they gave reds access to Trammel

[Yalp]

Ahh, the poster than uses little names like son and sport to cover up that they don't have a point. I was wondering when you would show up. Good job.

As I have stated several times, the color of a name has no impact on any player in Trammel. 4 count blues and 5 count rounds are one and the same in Trammel.

DUDE... I do have point.. made dozens of times within the previous 449 posts. So have many other peeps. It's clear you don't like the point and don't agree with it.. but it's a point made that applies to this discussion none the less.

 

[Draxous]

Ahh, the poster than uses little names like son and sport to cover up that they don't have a point. I was wondering when you would show up. Good job.

As I have stated several times, the color of a name has no impact on any player in Trammel. 4 count blues and 5 count rounds are one and the same in Trammel.

QFT

OH Surgeries.. been where you are at my friend.. don't waste it dude. Trying to dumb down the logic to people who have no desire to see the big picture is a waste of your talents my friend.. like trying to get a fish to ride a bicycle.

Suffice it to say.. these aren't the peeps that make the decisions about such matters and when the day is over it will be intelligent, educated peeps who get paid to make such decisions without ulterior motives or agendas.

You seeing this D'Amavir?

Comical. Apparently, he knows best what the Devs intend to do... without them even saying what that is!

Oh the irony stamped all over his post.

ROFL

I love this. D, you are my new hero.

 

[D'Amavir]

DUDE... I do have point.. made dozens of times within the previous 449 posts. So have many other peeps. It's clear you don't like the point and don't agree with it.. but it's a point made that applies to this discussion none the less.

I have read your posts, you never answered what impact a red character name had on you anywhere. If you have answered that simple question, quote it for me since I am so dense I obviously missed it. But like others that claim to have answered it, you won't find the answer anywhere in any of your posts. I guess people have to be in some mind meld with you to hear answers you aren't saying. Make it easy for us mortals and just show me the answer you claim to have made.

 

[Draxous]

DUDE, He has a point!!! you'll just never figure it out or ever see him make it.

 

[Yalp]

I would love to hear what my ulterior motive is since I don't play in Fel, don't have a red and don't pk. Since you seem to know, fill me in. But, sadly, you won't. You will just post a comment to someone that also feels the need to skip over points and just make silly comments telling them how simpatico you two are.

There are people on this thread that actually get what the thread is about.Its about the concept of allowing reds in Trammel. Its not about what the game mechanics are currently. Sadly, you aren't one of them. But keep up the nonsense posts to pad your post count. I am sure your e-ego is delighted that you once again got several posts added to your count without actually discussion the thread you were posting on.

the last refuge for those who have lost the debate is always to ignore the points of discussion.

and in case you missed it in any of the HUNDREDS of previous posts..

allowing reds in tram is doing away with an action = consequence principle. There has not been enough evidence brought forth by those espousing the idea to rise to the level needed to eliminate a basic tenament of our current in-game society.

In Sum the arguments related to allowing Reds in tram are:

1) Being red is no different than being blue with 4 murder counts (which has been addressed and countered many times)

2) Being red and restricted to fel forces our community to splinter (which has been addressed and countered many times)

3) Being red in tram with tram rulesets will not impact blues playstyle in any way (which has been addressed and countered many times)

4) Being red and restricted to fel is archaic and the system needs modernized (which has been addressed and countered)

5) Being red in tram is something red haters just can't stand. ( which isn't worth the time it takes to counter)

... maybe I missed some other point.. if I have, please add-on

 

[Lady_Mina]

Actually, in the old days everyone was stuck on one facet. You shoulda been there, it was a game with promise.

You should make your own thread where you go over what all the game mechanics are currently in UO. Since that is what you seem to dwell on. Leave those of us that are actually discussing something else to do so without having to weed through your rehash of what the game mechanics are.

Keep on dreaming of your perfect world where reds and blues are standing hand in hand at Brit West Bank Trammel.

LOL

Keep on dreaming cause it will never be.

If you want to go to trammel...log on your blue.
Simple as that.

 

[Lady_Mina]

And since you claim to be pre-trammel...i'd love to see your account age.

Cause 'i'm pre trammel and born in fel' is something i hear a lot...even if their account is from 2002.

 

[Surgeries]

OH Surgeries.. been where you are at my friend.. don't waste it dude. Trying to dumb down the logic to people who have no desire to see the big picture is a waste of your talents my friend.. like trying to get a fish to ride a bicycle.

Suffice it to say.. these aren't the peeps that make the decisions about such matters and when the day is over it will be intelligent, educated peeps who get paid to make such decisions without ulterior motives or agendas.

Indeed, Yalp. I am with you.

I understand that is why God invented Ignore functions.

And as far as proving to anyone what is and isn't logic concerning Reds in Trammel...LOL...I guess, in this case particularly, we will let the years speak for themselves. As they have for the last 8+.

I think that is proof enough.

I won't say "Never"...but my bet is that the Seahawks will make the playoffs and win the Super Bowl, long before anything like Reds in Trammel occurs.

'Nuff Said.

 

[Draxous]

In Sum the arguments related to allowing Reds in tram are:

1) Being red is no different than being blue with 4 murder counts (which has been addressed and countered many times)

2) Being red and restricted to fel forces our community to splinter (which has been addressed and countered many times)

3) Being red in tram with tram rulesets will not impact blues playstyle in any way (which has been addressed and countered many times)

4) Being red and restricted to fel is archaic and the system needs modernized (which has been addressed and countered)

5) Being red in tram is something red haters just can't stand. ( which isn't worth the time it takes to counter)

... maybe I missed some other point.. if I have, please add-on

lol!!! Way to make things up.

1. Has been addressed, but not countered.

2. Hasn't been addressed, has been speculated on by mapelstone and I, and most certainly hasn't been countered.

3. Has not been addressed (Oh wait, once by surgeries and he agreed that it doesn't have an impact) and most definately didn't get countered...

4. Has not been addressed, oh wait... I addressed it in another thread and you nor anyone else has yet to counter.

5. Has been addressed and it's the only reason you're arguing endlessly in this thread, because as well all know how you and your camp love to give opinions on things that have no effect or bearing on you what-so-ever.


I'm noticing a trend... you seem to think countering these points is agreeing with them... well good job!

 

[Ash]

I have read your posts, you never answered what impact a red character name had on you anywhere. If you have answered that simple question, quote it for me since I am so dense I obviously missed it. But like others that claim to have answered it, you won't find the answer anywhere in any of your posts. I guess people have to be in some mind meld with you to hear answers you aren't saying. Make it easy for us mortals and just show me the answer you claim to have made.

Red=Murderer
Red Color name didn't come in a box of cereal after all.

Blues (non-PvPers)=Victim

Banishment = Penalty

No Penalty leads to more Murderers

More Murderers = Bad for Blues

Let me guess, "I don't see it".. But there it is drawn out for ya, a straight correlation.

 

[D'Amavir]

the last refuge for those who have lost the debate is always to ignore the points of discussion.

and in case you missed it in any of the HUNDREDS of previous posts..

allowing reds in tram is doing away with an action = consequence principle. There has not been enough evidence brought forth by those espousing the idea to rise to the level needed to eliminate a basic tenament of our current in-game society.

So, to sum up the above, red names have no impact on you.You just choose to push the 'they did it so they have to suffer for it' logic instead of accepting that allowing reds in Trammel would really have no negative impacts on you other than not getting your way. Nothing wrong with that.

Just curious, why would you even bother with a thread about discussing the possibility of allowing reds in trammel if you weren't going to even listen to the points made by others to support it? After all, if I pk and am red, what facet I travel on after that initial fact should be irrelevant. Except, of course, like I said, you not getting your way. I can accept that as an answer. Would have been much faster if you just came out and said that from the start instead of just rehashing comment after comment stating what the current game mechanic is.

This thread is about discussion on why it should or should not be allowed. Your hate for reds that one up you shouldn't play such a role, but such is the nature of emotions. As I said before, I don't play a red, travel to Fel or pk. To me, its just common sense that if a blue with murder counts is allowed in Trammel without it causing a time vortex, allowing a red with 5counts shouldn't either.

I am the quintessential Trammy. I used to pvp in Fel before it was called Fel, I used to have reds and I used to have statloss. Now, I never get pk'd. Unlike you apparently. I guess thats why my emotions are as clouded with hate towards another's playstyle choice. They don't impact me in Fel, since I don't go there. And they wouldn't impact me if they were allowed in Trammel. Same as for you really. Just that I don't hold a grudge about being pk'd in the past to the point where I close my mind to any discussion about changing the current game mechanics surrounding Reds in Trammel.

 

[Draxous]

I think that is proof enough.

I won't say "Never"...but my bet is that the Seahawks will make the playoffs and win the Super Bowl, long before anything like Reds in Trammel occurs.

'Nuff Said.

Oh? Backpedal much?

It is a fact, also, that the Reds will never will be in Trammel.

So...does that make you feel better, too? Facts is Facts

Your logic, is AMAZING!

 

[Yalp]

Indeed, Yalp. I am with you.

I understand that is why God invented Ignore functions.

And as far as proving to anyone what is and isn't logic concerning Reds in Trammel...LOL...I guess, in this case particularly, we will let the years speak for themselves. As they have for the last 8+.

I think that is proof enough.

I won't say "Never"...but my bet is that the Seahawks will make the playoffs and win the Super Bowl, long before anything like Reds in Trammel occurs.

'Nuff Said.

here's one for ya.. someone from another planet will win the Ms Universe pagent...

 

[D'Amavir]

And since you claim to be pre-trammel...i'd love to see your account age.

Cause 'i'm pre trammel and born in fel' is something i hear a lot...even if their account is from 2002.

I will be the first to admit, most of my gameplay took place long before Trammel. I played from 98 to 2002 steadily. Then left for different periods of time. Not sure what that matters really. Except for another way forsomeone to ignore points and divert the thread to another topic not originally intended by the original poster.

My account age is right at 87 months for your information. Hope that helps you come to terms with your failure to make any points related to the original topic.

 

[Surgeries]

I haven't ignored anything. I accept that going red was a choice just like going to fel is a choice. Once you make either choice, you should have to deal with it.

That is 100% Correct.

Until they change the rules, when a person goes Red, they stay in Fel, until they go Blue...that was their choice, and they just need to deal with it.

There you go. By your own words, and by your logic...Reds deal with their choices, and they stay in Fel. Glad we finally agree. You are showing some promise.

Case Closed...have a good one.

 

[Draxous]

Just curious, why would you even bother with a thread about discussing the possibility of allowing reds in trammel if you weren't going to even listen to the points made by others to support it? After all, if I pk and am red, what facet I travel on after that initial fact should be irrelevant. Except, of course, like I said, you not getting your way. I can accept that as an answer. Would have been much faster if you just came out and said that from the start instead of just rehashing comment after comment stating what the current game mechanic is.

you!

Surgeries, Ash, Yalp and Mina it seems... have issues with being wrong and made to look foolish in a discussion, that doesn't even effect or pertain to them.

 

[D'Amavir]

here's one for ya.. someone from another planet will win the Ms Universe pagent...

And statloss will be removed from Reds. Wait, ummm. What was the point again? Oh yeah, something you can't possible know as fact is stated as if its fact. Continue please. I would love to see more off topic comments like the above to pad your post count.

I guess I should call you son or scooter or something equally mature. But I refuse to stoop.

 

[Draxous]

I haven't ignored anything. I accept that going red was a choice just like going to fel is a choice. Once you make either choice, you should have to deal with it.

That is 100% Correct.

Until they change the rules, when a person goes Red, they stay in Fel, until they go Blue...that was their choice, and they just need to deal with it.

There you go. By your own words, and by your logic...Reds deal with their choices, and they stay in Fel. Glad we finally agree. You are showing some promise.

Case Closed...have a good one.

Isn't that what this entire thread is discussing? LOL

So what in the hell could Surgeries be making all these posts about?

And remember D'Amavir, unless you agree with Surgeries... (lol) you show no promise, no logic and heaven forbid *gasp* any good sense... ROFL

 

[D'Amavir]

That is 100% Correct.

Until they change the rules, when a person goes Red, they stay in Fel, until they go Blue...that was their choice, and they just need to deal with it.

There you go. By your own words, and by your logic...Reds deal with their choices, and they stay in Fel. Glad we finally agree. You are showing some promise.

Case Closed...have a good one.

Never said otherwise. This thread was actually about changing that current fact. Yes, reds aren't allowed in Trammel currently. That doesn't mean that there should never be a discussion of what would happen if that mechanic was changed. But you don't seem interested in discussing that topic, which again confuses me because you have so many posts in a thread about a topic you think shouldn't be discussed.

Talk on these boards and others got statloss removed. You may have nightmares about that fact every night but its still true. And discussions of several topics on these boards and others have led to changes to current mechanics. Which is why actual discussion is welcomed. You don't want to discuss that topic, so why continue to post on a thread about that topic? You don't see me posting over and over in the 'getting seeds from monsters' thread because its not something I care to discuss. Would it make sense for me to go there and nuke everyone that chooses to discuss that topic just because its not something I want to discuss?

 

[D'Amavir]

Isn't that what this entire thread is discussing? LOL

So what in the hell could Surgeries be making all these posts about?

And remember D'Amavir, unless you agree with Surgeries... (lol) you show no promise, no logic and heaven forbid *gasp* any good sense... ROFL

Sadly, there were actually people willing to discuss this topic posting on this thread until it was derailed by that group of like minded individuals. Maybe we can get back to that now that their made up 'case' is finally closed. Here's hoping at least.

 

[Yalp]

lol!!! Way to make things up.

1. Has been addressed, but not countered.

2. Hasn't been addressed, has been speculated on by mapelstone and I, and most certainly hasn't been countered.

3. Has not been addressed (Oh wait, once by surgeries and he agreed that it doesn't have an impact) and most definately didn't get countered...

4. Has not been addressed, oh wait... I addressed it in another thread and you nor anyone else has yet to counter.

5. Has been addressed and it's the only reason you're arguing endlessly in this thread, because as well all know how you and your camp love to give opinions on things that have no effect or bearing on you what-so-ever.


I'm noticing a trend... you seem to think countering these points is agreeing with them... well good job!

Just a quick review of posts on this page alone...

1) #444
2) #425, #442
3) #403, # 412, #415, # 416, #418, #419, #443, #455, #460
4) same as above

 

[D'Amavir]

From a community point of view, I see a player getting on a blue as being like the "yes I am aged 14+" click-through on a web page. Yes, functionally it makes no difference, but it's an acknowledgment of acceptance to play nice.

You see, mostly I'm just worried about the psychology of having a "red team" and a "blue team" in Tram. I look at the way people gang up in us-vs-them tribes on the these boards and its just not healthy - it tears the community apart and drives people off the boards. I have no proof that this is the way it would end up playing out in-game and perhaps I underestimate our collective maturity-level, but my gut instinct is that it would go badly.

I could also make a role-playing argument about murders exiled to Fel, but whatever I said would also apply to any PvM dread lord ... I'll leave that as a topic for another day.

To get back onto the topic at hand, I agree that the red vs blue conflict would be bad for the game. And I also get the 'age of consent' argument. The only problem with that is that, just like the quick dropdowns for age confirmation on websites, there are really no ways to ensure that people choosing that option are really agreeing to 'play nice' as you call it.

I have seen quite a few blue characters that seem to go out of their way to degrade and disgust even in Trammel. Those people give blues and reds a bad name. What is the fix for that? Not sure. Other than higher standards for behavior in game. Its one thing to rp an evil bastage. But to go so far as to act in a way for no other reason than to ruin someone else's game enjoyment is something that should be addressed.

 

[Lady_Mina]

I will be the first to admit, most of my gameplay took place long before Trammel. I played from 98 to 2002 steadily. Then left for different periods of time. Not sure what that matters really. Except for another way forsomeone to ignore points and divert the thread to another topic not originally intended by the original poster.

My account age is right at 87 months for your information. Hope that helps you come to terms with your failure to make any points related to the original topic.

I'm a person who loves to see some proof of what you're saying.

So before pointing fingers and saying 'you should have been there'...i'd like to see some proof that you were actualy there and not just lieing about it like 90% of the people that claim to be pre-trammel.

 

[Ash]

you!

Surgeries, Ash, Yalp and Mina it seems... have issues with being wrong and made to look foolish in a discussion, that doesn't even effect or pertain to them.

Ohh, back to name calling, tsk tsk..

You have yet to prove how this change would not effect me or anyone else for that matter.

Like it or not, it does, as the penalty for existing reds is also a deterrent against others going on a killing spree. Any deterrent that is removed makes it more likely for rise in PKs, the nasty blue that hovers at 4 no longer has a reason to stay blue so increases his PKs and no longer worries about the count. But, i forget all you know how to do is worry about reds and name call, so the concept is totally lost on you.

 

[Yalp]

Sadly, there were actually people willing to discuss this topic posting on this thread until it was derailed by that group of like minded individuals. Maybe we can get back to that now that their made up 'case' is finally closed. Here's hoping at least.

Would LOVE LOVE LOVE to discuss the issue with you.. have been from the start.. have offered counterpoints... that is what debate is about, sadly, peeps don't want a debate they just want validation of their points..... for the record.. I am in great favor of removing all colors from the game, making pvp truly consentual on all servers and being done with it..

of course those who like to gank or cheat would only have 1 or 2 days to pvp until no one would consent to dueling with them.. but hey.. they can start a different thread.. no?

 

[D'Amavir]

Indeed that is the topic.. reds having access to trammel.. but not the side argument of HOW players got red.. or whether the murder system is fair, or whether some blues exploit the system to commit the same acts as a red but avoid the consequences. This part is a very valid discussion and may indeed need to be more closely looked at by the devs/pvp player base.

I agree. Those issues need to be addressed. I am all for a character going red after just one murder count. Those discussions definitely need to be had. I just don't think that was the intent of this thread.

As long as the devs allow open pvp in Fel and pk'd characters are given the option to give counts, you will always have reds. Its just the nature of the game. How that actuality is dealt with can be improved, definitely.

The fact that blues play the 'stay under 5 counts' game just supports my opinion that reds in Trammel isn't something that negatively impacts anyone. If those blues with murder counts (and by definition they are murderers even if they don't turn red) can access Trammel, why shouldn't those players that accept the murder label fully and don't try to game the system also be able to?

 

[Yalp]

I'm a person who loves to see some proof of what you're saying.

So before pointing fingers and saying 'you should have been there'...i'd like to see some proof that you were actualy there and not just lieing about it like 90% of the people that claim to be pre-trammel.

not from me.. i'm a relative young' em at 3 years.

 

[Yalp]

I agree. Those issues need to be addressed. I am all for a character going red after just one murder count. Those discussions definitely need to be had. I just don't think that was the intent of this thread.

As long as the devs allow open pvp in Fel and pk'd characters are given the option to give counts, you will always have reds. Its just the nature of the game. How that actuality is dealt with can be improved, definitely.

The fact that blues play the 'stay under 5 counts' game just supports my opinion that reds in Trammel isn't something that negatively impacts anyone. If those blues with murder counts (and by definition they are murderers even if they don't turn red) can access Trammel, why shouldn't those players that accept the murder label fully and don't try to game the system also be able to?

agreed.. it's a totally valid topic to address and worthy of peeps laying out pro and con points... no argument there.

 

[D'Amavir]

I'm a person who loves to see some proof of what you're saying.

So before pointing fingers and saying 'you should have been there'...i'd like to see some proof that you were actualy there and not just lieing about it like 90% of the people that claim to be pre-trammel.

I wasn't pointing fingers. You made the comment that in the old days, reds were restricted to just one facet. My point was only that in my version of the old days, there was only one facet. If you don't believe that I played this game pre Trammel, I don't know anything I can say to change that belief. If you know a way, let me know and I will do it.

I played before second age, before trammel and before Ren. That is a fact. I could show you an account age screenshot to which you would only counter with 'well you bought that account'. Its a viscious circle on non belief that I don't care to get involved in.

As an example

Welcome XXXXXX, member since February 1998.

That comes directly from the ultima registration site. Is that proof enough for you? I doubt it but you asked for proof and I countered with proof. Even though that really proves nothing. And besides, to me that seems like just another attempt by you to derail the topic at hand to prevent those on both sides that DO want to discuss it from doing so.

 

[D'Amavir]

agreed.. it's a totally valid topic to address and worthy of peeps laying out pro and con points... no argument there.

Personally, I would be ok with murderers and murder counts being removed completely. Its not a playstyle that interests me. However, I think it would put yet another nail in the growing group of nails in the coffin of UO. I am not saying that that change alone would end UO. But it would cut down on player accounts even more in a time when low accounts are already an issue.

 

[Draxous]

Ohh, back to name calling, tsk tsk..

You have yet to prove how this change would not effect me or anyone else for that matter.

Like it or not, it does, as the penalty for existing reds is also a deterrent against others going on a killing spree. Any deterrent that is removed makes it more likely for rise in PKs, the nasty blue that hovers at 4 no longer has a reason to stay blue so increases his PKs and no longer worries about the count. But, i forget all you know how to do is worry about reds and name call, so the concept is totally lost on you.

Blue pks, will still be blue pks and blue pks... regardless if reds are allowed in Trammel.

There are more incentives than what you claim above to stay blue... virtues and the benefits they give would be one... chivalry and having positive karma is easier as a blue... so on and so on. So to say that you understand the motives of "an evil blue" when you are not one, is hilarious. I, on the other hand being one and having more than 10 years of experience with it can safely say you have no clue of what you're even talking about. You can call me a noto-pk, my real name, since that's what we are.


So you're saying that this change would effect you because not going to trammel on that character is deterrent to a blue player from killing you? LOL!!! Buddy, if anyone wants to kill you (I'll even put money on a crafter) I'm sure they'd have no problems doing it, even at 4 counts. Actually, I know they'd have no problems doing it, because it's been the case many many times in the past.

You attempt at playing devils advocate is coming off as quite hilarious, tho...

I appreciate the help your lending in showing how solid of an idea this really was.

Thanks!

 

[Draxous]

agreed.. it's a totally valid topic to address and worthy of peeps laying out pro and con points... no argument there.

Personally, I would be ok with murderers and murder counts being removed completely. Its not a playstyle that interests me. However, I think it would put yet another nail in the growing group of nails in the coffin of UO. I am not saying that that change alone would end UO. But it would cut down on player accounts even more in a time when low accounts are already an issue.

I think murderers and murder counts are essential to the spirit of this game and the shard of Siege Perilous (I've already said this.)

I think we need to bring the community back together, allow them to interact and I wonder, just wonder how many non-PvPers might actually befriend PvPers afterwards. You would know obviously those who PvP as they wouldn't be so apt to mask their identities. You might notice that Jerks come in all colors and in all facets... not just Felucca.

 

[Yalp]

I wasn't pointing fingers. You made the comment that in the old days, reds were restricted to just one facet. My point was only that in my version of the old days, there was only one facet. If you don't believe that I played this game pre Trammel, I don't know anything I can say to change that belief. If you know a way, let me know and I will do it.

I played before second age, before trammel and before Ren. That is a fact. I could show you an account age screenshot to which you would only counter with 'well you bought that account'. Its a viscious circle on non belief that I don't care to get involved in.

As an example

Welcome XXXXXX, member since February 1998.

That comes directly from the ultima registration site. Is that proof enough for you? I doubt it but you asked for proof and I countered with proof. Even though that really proves nothing. And besides, to me that seems like just another attempt by you to derail the topic at hand to prevent those on both sides that DO want to discuss it from doing so.

it wasn't me who asked you to prove it, so no argument from me anywhere there dude.. i don't debate by calling peeps liars.. start at the assumption every one is honest ( I know.. this day and age its quaint). I think there's much to be learned about what the game was from peeps who were there... why the devs made the decisions they did and such.. it's good info to be put out there... keep on throwing it out there every time you like!

 

[Draxous]

Would LOVE LOVE LOVE to discuss the issue with you.. have been from the start.. have offered counterpoints... that is what debate is about, sadly, peeps don't want a debate they just want validation of their points..... for the record.. I am in great favor of removing all colors from the game, making pvp truly consentual on all servers and being done with it..

of course those who like to gank or cheat would only have 1 or 2 days to pvp until no one would consent to dueling with them.. but hey.. they can start a different thread.. no?

So, in this "scenario" you describe... why would you be against a landmass that had "open" PvP for those with-in it to experience?

Isn't what you're talking about here, exactly what Ultima is right now?

*confused*

 

[Yalp]

So, in this "scenario" you describe... why would you be against a landmass that had "open" PvP for those with-in it to experience?

Isn't what you're talking about here, exactly what Ultima is right now?

*confused*

removing colors would be removing the action = consequence principle..

why wouldn't you be in favor?

 

[Ash]

Blue pks, will still be blue pks and blue pks... regardless if reds are allowed in Trammel.

There are more incentives than what you claim above to stay blue... virtues and the benefits they give would be one... chivalry and having positive karma is easier as a blue... so on and so on. So to say that you understand the motives of "an evil blue" when you are not one, is hilarious. I, on the other hand being one and having more than 10 years of experience with it can safely say you have no clue of what you're even talking about. You can call me a noto-pk, my real name, since that's what we are.

Never meant to imply it would cause all evil blues to go red, just increase the odds. But glad to see you showing your true colors, so you went from being a red hunter to a wannabe red "evil blue".

So you're saying that this change would effect you because not going to trammel on that character is deterrent to a blue player from killing you? LOL!!! Buddy, if anyone wants to kill you (I'll even put money on a crafter) I'm sure they'd have no problems doing it, even at 4 counts. Actually, I know they'd have no problems doing it, because it's been the case many many times in the past.

Ahh more personal attacks and assumptions.. tsk tsk.. Just keep revealing yourself as the Red Wannabe that you are. And I never claimed to be good at PvP yet more times than not it still takes 2 or more, so send your crafter if you want to loose some gold.


The point is still removing a penalty/deterrent on reds has impact on blues. Just because you would continue to try and stay under the radar doesn't mean all evil blues would. But you keep hiding under the blue, but wait hasn't even your supporter stated that evil blues are worse than anything.

 

[Radun]

Of course allowing reds into trammel rulesets won't effect anyone who doesn't leave trammel rulesets
The point of forcing reds to stay in fel is so they can't escape player justice.
Letting reds into trammel effects everyone who goes to fel and gets pked.

 

[Draxous]

So, in this "scenario" you describe... why would you be against a landmass that had "open" PvP for those with-in it to experience?

Isn't what you're talking about here, exactly what Ultima is right now?

*confused*

removing colors would be removing the action = consequence principle..

why wouldn't you be in favor?

You skipped my first question.

Why I wouldn't be in favor of it? The system is essential to Siege, and that shard isn't going anywhere. Players rely on it... but, not the players playing shards with "Trammel."


The whole reason I brought up this thread is because I noticed how broken the system seemed. PvP is entirely consensual as you don't have to experience it if you don't want to. So if your actions are just a preference and not an integral part of a dynamic world, why should a player who chooses one over the other... be forced to face consequences for enjoying something others don't necessarily.


I hope that explained it? Now, could you grace me with your opinion on having a landmass where PvPers are allowed to openly fight amongst eachother without seeking and asking for individual consent?

 

[Draxous]

Of course allowing reds into trammel rulesets won't effect anyone who doesn't leave trammel rulesets
The point of forcing reds to stay in fel is so they can't escape player justice.
Letting reds into trammel effects everyone who goes to fel and gets pked.

So a red signing on his blue and going to Trammel, when he's not PvPing... isn't escaping player justice?

 

[Yalp]

... why should a player who chooses one over the other... be forced to face consequences for enjoying something others don't necessarily.

choices and consequences....

 

[Yalp]

So a red signing on his blue and going to Trammel, when he's not PvPing... isn't escaping player justice? [/QUOTE

are you arguing that a player that has 1 red toon should have all his toons restricted to fel since then he wouldn't be able to escape justice?

 

[D'Amavir]

Of course allowing reds into trammel rulesets won't effect anyone who doesn't leave trammel rulesets
The point of forcing reds to stay in fel is so they can't escape player justice.
Letting reds into trammel effects everyone who goes to fel and gets pked.

Thats actually a decent argument. There would have to be some system in place to counter the dodging player justice aspect. However, in this age of multiple alts its just too easy to log onto your red only when you wanted to pk then hop on a blue when you didn't want to deal with that aspect. They are still dodging player justice in that scenario and I don't see many ways that can be curbed.

I don't see many options when it comes to forcing reds to be subject to player justice. I guess allowing reds in Trammel would increase that possibility. But I am just not sold on that being reason enough not to allow it. Maybe though.

I miss the bounty hunter system, flawed as it was. It actually encouraged people to hunt reds and sorta rewarded them for doing so. Maybe a system that improved on that concept could be enacted to further activities in Fel. But that would lead us back to the 'reds just want victims, not pvp' posts. I am sure there are those reds where that statement is true. Just like there are blues that are 100% worse when it comes to griefing or harassing than any 10 reds are.

 

[Radun]

So a red signing on his blue and going to Trammel, when he's not PvPing... isn't escaping player justice?

that's right. because the blue isn't a murderer. he doesn't use that character to murder.

 

[D'Amavir]

So a red signing on his blue and going to Trammel, when he's not PvPing... isn't escaping player justice? [/QUOTE

are you arguing that a player that has 1 red toon should have all his toons restricted to fel since then he wouldn't be able to escape justice?

As you have noticed, I don't support the reds restricted to fel concept. However, I wouldn't be opposed to making all characters on an account red if one character is red. That will get a lot of heat from reds and blues that pk I am sure. But it is one way to ensure that player justice can be enacted and not allow red players to hop from pk to blue trammy just by logging into a different character.

 

[Yalp]

that's right. because the blue isn't a murderer. he doesn't use that character to murder.

not player justice ... toon justice.....

 

[Yalp]

As you have noticed, I don't support the reds restricted to fel concept. However, I wouldn't be opposed to making all characters on an account red if one character is red. That will get a lot of heat from reds and blues that pk I am sure. But it is one way to ensure that player justice can be enacted and not allow red players to hop from pk to blue trammy just by logging into a different character.

so you are for the player being dealt the justice and not the toon?

 

[D'Amavir]

that's right. because the blue isn't a murderer. he doesn't use that character to murder.

That takes up back to the definition of murderer. I believe that the current game mechanic is flawed in regards to getting 1-4 murder counts as opposed to going to 5. I think a murderer should be a murderer with just one count. And that there should be some additional game mechanic put in place to remove the murderer title from a character. Just standing in your house and burning off counts doesn't seem sufficient to me.

 

[D'Amavir]

so you are for the player being dealt the justice and not the toon?

In regards to ensuring player justice can happen, yes. I don't think thats the perfect answer, no. But I wouldn't be opposed if it meant that players thought twice on if it was worth it to kill that miner just because they werent build for pvp.

I would much rather see a system in place that addressed player justice on a character by character basis, I just don't see an easy fix for that.

 

[Radun]

not player justice ... toon justice.....

player justice as in the players serve justice, as opposed to NPCs or other game mechanics.

 

[Draxous]

So a red signing on his blue and going to Trammel, when he's not PvPing... isn't escaping player justice? [/QUOTE

are you arguing that a player that has 1 red toon should have all his toons restricted to fel since then he wouldn't be able to escape justice?

As you have noticed, I don't support the reds restricted to fel concept. However, I wouldn't be opposed to making all characters on an account red if one character is red. That will get a lot of heat from reds and blues that pk I am sure. But it is one way to ensure that player justice can be enacted and not allow red players to hop from pk to blue trammy just by logging into a different character.

Interesting concept.

It's actually one of the main reasons people on Siege insist on keeping it to 1 character per account on that shard... so that, players cannot hide behind multiple characters/personas... and that your reputation is going to be a part of you.

One flaw in this design is for those players who share the same account. Maybe dad likes PKing people, mom likes hanging out crafting and customizing the house, so on and so on... I know 2 ppl IRL who play this game and share their 1 acct with family members.

Another flaw would be, Trammel... if a person enjoys PvP AND PvM, why should they not be allowed to enjoy the oodles of content that's been added to only the Trammel portion of this game? Doom, Bedlam, Labyrinth, Citadel and more...?

Unless they are allowed in Trammel... and then, they are "escaping" player justice as well, under the pretense of what we're assuming player justice is for this discussion.