Celina2009-04-24 20:10:23
QUOTE (Gwylifar @ Apr 24 2009, 03:03 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
It took me a few readings to figure it out but I think this is the idea. I'm not saying I agree or disagree with it, just trying to rephrase it to make it more clear.
Those people who are more likely to play the "bad guys" side seem to be more likely to also not want to keep up the fight when they're losing for long enough. Certainly not all of them, but more of them on that side than the other side. So when the "bad guys" side is winning, the bad guys are happy to fight because they're winning, and the good guys are happy to fight back because they're almost always happy to fight back. But when the "bad guys" side is losing, the good guys are happy to fight, but the bad guys are not so happy to fight back, and are more likely to quit, walk away, complain, or do something else.
Of course this is all generalizations. Obviously, not all of the people on either side will fit any personality, just that there's an increased likelihood. Obviously, anyone on either side will have a limit to how long they're willing to lose how hard before they get discouraged and stop, it's just that the limit might be higher on one side than the other. Etc. You can fill in all the other disclaimers (and it won't stop Celina from ranting at what this isn't saying but she thinks it is) if you like.
Again, I don't have an opinion whether this is true or not, I just think it's what Geb is saying. (Geb, feel free to tell me if I'm wrong!)
Those people who are more likely to play the "bad guys" side seem to be more likely to also not want to keep up the fight when they're losing for long enough. Certainly not all of them, but more of them on that side than the other side. So when the "bad guys" side is winning, the bad guys are happy to fight because they're winning, and the good guys are happy to fight back because they're almost always happy to fight back. But when the "bad guys" side is losing, the good guys are happy to fight, but the bad guys are not so happy to fight back, and are more likely to quit, walk away, complain, or do something else.
Of course this is all generalizations. Obviously, not all of the people on either side will fit any personality, just that there's an increased likelihood. Obviously, anyone on either side will have a limit to how long they're willing to lose how hard before they get discouraged and stop, it's just that the limit might be higher on one side than the other. Etc. You can fill in all the other disclaimers (and it won't stop Celina from ranting at what this isn't saying but she thinks it is) if you like.
Again, I don't have an opinion whether this is true or not, I just think it's what Geb is saying. (Geb, feel free to tell me if I'm wrong!)
Maybe I did misinterpret, wouldn't be the first time. At least don't be an ass about it. I didn't rant, hell, I even went back to clarify my perspective from both sides.
Narsrim2009-04-24 20:22:19
I have trouble finding anything interesting anymore and when I do, I tend to get burnt out within a few days. Everything has pretty much been done, and what's left to do involves a zerg and grinding. There are periodic remissions (like trying to steal the Knowledge Crown from Sidd), but otherwise, it's the same, day in. day out.
Arix2009-04-24 20:47:50
Design something then
Alef2009-04-24 20:47:51
I've been trying to get more involved with combat again.. I've found a few spars here and there for practice. But, I've been a little distracted bashing a little, fiddling with things in Treant and working on a system of my own lately, not to mention exams and such coming up in the next couple of weeks.
I don't mind fighting as the underdog, as long as the odds are not completely against me and I have no hope. In fact, often I have more fun losing than I do winning, having the chance to learn from the fight, and improve myself afterwards is where a lot of the fun lies for me.
I don't mind fighting as the underdog, as long as the odds are not completely against me and I have no hope. In fact, often I have more fun losing than I do winning, having the chance to learn from the fight, and improve myself afterwards is where a lot of the fun lies for me.
Vesar2009-04-24 20:51:30
After being away for so long, I can't even begin to get back into combat. There are too many new things, too many variables, too many new players. I can't keep up. I would have to completely redesign my system and stock up on tons of new things (teas??) to get back in. Too much work.. I have a real life to attend to.
Everiine2009-04-24 20:53:26
I think there are a number of reasons why there is less fighting.
The high entry level for combat is certainly a factor. You have to bash for months just to get to a point where you can survive raids and combat. And when people come in and singlehandedly stomp on you, even though you are Lvl. 65 with at least one trans skill, it doesn't take long before you think "what's the point?"
Celenwilde does have something to do with it. It served us well when Mag was beating down on us. Now though, it's more a hinderance even to people like me who want more conflict. Every time we try to move away from the alliance, we get whined at or told by important mobs that if we don't stick together it will be the end of the world (I'm talking recently).
Ridiculous enemyings dont' help either. I'm making up this example: if I bash Shallach once and get enemied to Shallach, Magnagora, Ur'Guard, Geomancers, Ninjakari, Morgfyre, Fain, and Raezon, what are the chances I'm going to risk getting hit by all of those shrines, guards, and statues and go raiding for fun? Not going to happen. It could be the other way too: bashing Centaurs in Hifarae getting you enemied to Serenwilde, Serenguard, Moondancers, Lisaera, Maylea, and Charune.
People will do anything to win. If it means crushing you so that you can never present a threat, that's what they'll do. And conflict will go away with the threat.
The high entry level for combat is certainly a factor. You have to bash for months just to get to a point where you can survive raids and combat. And when people come in and singlehandedly stomp on you, even though you are Lvl. 65 with at least one trans skill, it doesn't take long before you think "what's the point?"
Celenwilde does have something to do with it. It served us well when Mag was beating down on us. Now though, it's more a hinderance even to people like me who want more conflict. Every time we try to move away from the alliance, we get whined at or told by important mobs that if we don't stick together it will be the end of the world (I'm talking recently).
Ridiculous enemyings dont' help either. I'm making up this example: if I bash Shallach once and get enemied to Shallach, Magnagora, Ur'Guard, Geomancers, Ninjakari, Morgfyre, Fain, and Raezon, what are the chances I'm going to risk getting hit by all of those shrines, guards, and statues and go raiding for fun? Not going to happen. It could be the other way too: bashing Centaurs in Hifarae getting you enemied to Serenwilde, Serenguard, Moondancers, Lisaera, Maylea, and Charune.
People will do anything to win. If it means crushing you so that you can never present a threat, that's what they'll do. And conflict will go away with the threat.
Rika2009-04-24 20:58:43
Why conflict died in:
Magnagora: Thoros left
Serenwilde: Shuyin left
Celest: Thoros left so Magnagora stopped raiding so Celest stopped caring
Glomdoring: Only org to be taking part in more conflict, with Shuyin
Magnagora: Thoros left
Serenwilde: Shuyin left
Celest: Thoros left so Magnagora stopped raiding so Celest stopped caring
Glomdoring: Only org to be taking part in more conflict, with Shuyin
Iola2009-04-24 20:59:46
By and large, the point at which I stopped caring about combat was the point at which I didn't enjoy it anymore. Being a low-mid tier fighter can get disheartening quickly when no matter how good your system or how much you think about your offensive, you just die in a few hits.
Though, that was mostly Thoros.
Though, that was mostly Thoros.
Kante2009-04-24 21:01:02
I think one of the main things is what Everiine stated. The sheer amount of time you have to put in to get "good" or actually be able to survive is outstanding.
Many would argue that demi/ascendent isn't needed for combat, but it really looks to be getting that way. Let's take Vathael, for instance. We all know the lovable griefer. When I was wearing robes, he could drop me in five hits. Now that I'm a warrior, it's more like ten.
The point being, after practicing as hard as you can, you getting stomped by one person within thirty seconds definitely makes combat seem unapproachable and a waste of time and money. But, that may be just me. I'm one of those discontent people. I get angry when I don't win. Simple as that.
Edit: As a sidenote, I wasn't trying to insult or direct any sort of ill-will towards Vathael. From what I can tell, he's a pretty cool guy.
Many would argue that demi/ascendent isn't needed for combat, but it really looks to be getting that way. Let's take Vathael, for instance. We all know the lovable griefer. When I was wearing robes, he could drop me in five hits. Now that I'm a warrior, it's more like ten.
The point being, after practicing as hard as you can, you getting stomped by one person within thirty seconds definitely makes combat seem unapproachable and a waste of time and money. But, that may be just me. I'm one of those discontent people. I get angry when I don't win. Simple as that.
Edit: As a sidenote, I wasn't trying to insult or direct any sort of ill-will towards Vathael. From what I can tell, he's a pretty cool guy.
Alef2009-04-24 21:09:23
QUOTE (Kante @ Apr 24 2009, 10:01 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I get angry when I don't win. Simple as that.
What is it that makes you angry about a loss? The loss of experience? Herbs/Potions? The loss in general?
I don't mean to single you out like this, but I'm simply curious. I realise the playerbase is varied in what they enjoy, it's one of the attractions of the game, the fact that there is so much to do. But surely, by involving yourself in combat it is because you enjoy the fight? Or atleast some portion of it?
Noola2009-04-24 21:10:55
QUOTE (Everiine @ Apr 24 2009, 03:53 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
People will do anything to win. If it means crushing you so that you can never present a threat, that's what they'll do. And conflict will go away with the threat.
Folks do seem awfully hung up on 'winning' an unwinnable game, don't they?
Unknown2009-04-24 21:14:32
QUOTE (rika @ Apr 24 2009, 01:58 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Why conflict died in:
Magnagora: Thoros left
Serenwilde: Shuyin left
Celest: Thoros left so Magnagora stopped raiding so Celest stopped caring
Glomdoring: Only org to be taking part in more conflict, with Shuyin
Magnagora: Thoros left
Serenwilde: Shuyin left
Celest: Thoros left so Magnagora stopped raiding so Celest stopped caring
Glomdoring: Only org to be taking part in more conflict, with Shuyin
Hahaha.
The conflict's there, just gotta dig for it, people just aren't seeing the usual suspects flashily running around as in the past.
Richter2009-04-24 21:14:48
Because I have to have to have a degree in computer science in order to fight.
Ronny2009-04-24 21:19:45
I hear if you take down the Star/Necromentate/Drums/Flame and drain the Nexus to 0, you win the game.
Furien2009-04-24 21:21:19
Because, for my class, sleep is broken and it's impossible to kill anyone over level 80.
Also, it's just boring. With exams coming up, I want my time to mean something, but there's never nothing meaningful in-game anymore. My last 'group conflict' was...a 4 AM Rockholm raid? Where it was impossible to hold any of the two raiders down. 1v1 would be against Shamarah which I lost because it's impossible for me to put him to sleep and he eventually managed to get an ecto/tumble/crucify kill. After..9+ tries. GG, affliction classes.
Anyone else get the feeling that Bards and Monks threw the game out of whack? Before that, you had:
Warriors: Damage, stronger afflictions at higher levels of wounding.
Wiccans/Guardians: Afflictions, burst, damage support.
Druids/Mages: Crowd Control, widespread afflictions.
Roles were pretty decently defined, everything had its unique place. Now we've got:
Bards: Damage, puke out afflictions and hope for more damage.
Monks: Afflictions, just far better and faster than warriors and wiccans/guardians can dish them out.
Not much complexity in these two classes, outside of needing an excel spreadsheet to operate monks with any flexibility.
Also, it's just boring. With exams coming up, I want my time to mean something, but there's never nothing meaningful in-game anymore. My last 'group conflict' was...a 4 AM Rockholm raid? Where it was impossible to hold any of the two raiders down. 1v1 would be against Shamarah which I lost because it's impossible for me to put him to sleep and he eventually managed to get an ecto/tumble/crucify kill. After..9+ tries. GG, affliction classes.
Anyone else get the feeling that Bards and Monks threw the game out of whack? Before that, you had:
Warriors: Damage, stronger afflictions at higher levels of wounding.
Wiccans/Guardians: Afflictions, burst, damage support.
Druids/Mages: Crowd Control, widespread afflictions.
Roles were pretty decently defined, everything had its unique place. Now we've got:
Bards: Damage, puke out afflictions and hope for more damage.
Monks: Afflictions, just far better and faster than warriors and wiccans/guardians can dish them out.
Not much complexity in these two classes, outside of needing an excel spreadsheet to operate monks with any flexibility.
Nienla2009-04-24 21:22:48
Chokechokechoke
Celina2009-04-24 21:24:46
QUOTE (rika @ Apr 24 2009, 03:58 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Why conflict died in:
Magnagora: Thoros left
Serenwilde: Shuyin left
Celest: Thoros left so Magnagora stopped raiding so Celest stopped caring
Glomdoring: Only org to be taking part in more conflict, with Shuyin
Magnagora: Thoros left
Serenwilde: Shuyin left
Celest: Thoros left so Magnagora stopped raiding so Celest stopped caring
Glomdoring: Only org to be taking part in more conflict, with Shuyin
A simplistic, but remarkably accurate summary.
"Super fighters" that people tend to gravitate towards do a lot for conflict. When they go, things tend to drop off. Celest had a recent period of inactivity, but when Narsrim returned from a period of dormancy, raids peaked. Sadly, they are always artied and in one form or another and have some form of survivability (cubix/pyramid/demesne in Narsrim's case, warrior tankyness/cubix in thor/shuyin's case)
Mag has attempted a couple raids recently, and both times we were outnumbered fairly dramatically. Sadly, the first thing that went up were shrine powers. Wrath, gravity, distort, invasion, all of them. Poof, raid over. I hate shrines. I'll use distort on occasion to keep it from turning into a zerg and to screw up trueheal, but beyond that, I very rarely touch the other powers.
As for the anger over losing, I'll state my perspective. I'll fight if it's a fight, and if I lose, it doesn't bother me. I won't die for the sake of dying though, which means I won't face impossible odds, and being forced to and losing makes me angry. Not the loss of essence or xp, just the feeling of "This isn't conflict, this is a artied to hell/monk/zerg slaughter."
Rika2009-04-24 21:26:11
QUOTE (Nienla @ Apr 25 2009, 09:22 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Chokechokechoke
Doesn't it speak a lot when choke existed in one form or another for so many years without killing conflict and then bards and monks, especially, came out and after a few "fixes", pretty quickly killed it?
PS: Choke needs a better nerf.
EDIT: Celina agreed with me.
Kante2009-04-24 21:27:28
QUOTE (Alef @ Apr 24 2009, 05:09 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
What is it that makes you angry about a loss? The loss of experience? Herbs/Potions? The loss in general?
I don't mean to single you out like this, but I'm simply curious. I realise the playerbase is varied in what they enjoy, it's one of the attractions of the game, the fact that there is so much to do. But surely, by involving yourself in combat it is because you enjoy the fight? Or atleast some portion of it?
I don't mean to single you out like this, but I'm simply curious. I realise the playerbase is varied in what they enjoy, it's one of the attractions of the game, the fact that there is so much to do. But surely, by involving yourself in combat it is because you enjoy the fight? Or atleast some portion of it?
It'll sound stupid and pathetic, but in general, I suck at everything I do. Video games, writing, drawing, sports, everything I've tried I suck at. So, I like to find things that I can be good at, I like to find things that I can win at.
I realize it takes a lot of practice, and maybe I'm just completely impatient. But, I get frustrated easily.
Kelysa2009-04-24 21:30:43
Sleep is pretty harsh isn't it? We really need some way to built at least mild levels of sleepiness on people to even have a sleeplock work in the most remotely basic of ways.
