iceman Posted Apr 19, 2011, 12:18 am	To make this fair I think there should be four options in the vote on 20 April: 1. Open PvP south of GW with current bounty system 2. Open PvP south of GW with no bounty system to avoid PvP 2A. Open PVP south of GW with much higher bounties [Edit: added for Dodger] 3. Open PvP south of GW with lower bounty payments to avoid PvP 4. PvP flag system to be able to avoid PvP for free, like it was before I think we should take the two most popular options to a run-off the following week I'm sure (alongside the usual abuse), some people can think of some other options that should be on the ballot... ...but at least there would be some semblance of choice about a vote by the method suggested above
*Grograt* gary.r.horder@gmail.com Posted Apr 19, 2011, 12:30 am	why is there a choice for lower bounty This wouldnt come up on the vote
FireFly Posted Apr 19, 2011, 12:36 am	Because grograt, our Johnnynever here (Just making sure everyone knows its him ) is the only one that complains that the PvP bounties are to expensive and is hoping to get more votes on the subject by sneaking it in there.
*sam* Posted Apr 19, 2011, 1:13 am	I think polls with too many similar options don't work; you can never really be sure whether the top ranking option was actually the best one, since similar options steal votes from each other. I was thinking more along the lines of a yes/no! with the understanding that you need say 60%/65% for a definite answer, anything closer than that would lead to an extended trial and re-vote.
FireFly Posted Apr 19, 2011, 1:20 am	"Did the veterans do bad things to you when you dropped the soap under the new system?" Y/N
d0dger Posted Apr 19, 2011, 1:33 am	Bounties are way too low. They should be increased (for those that can afford it)
Groovelle Posted Apr 19, 2011, 5:03 am	I don't know if anyone else would use it but a "don't care" or "undecided" option would be my first choice. I'm very ambivalent on this one - my PvP flag is on but I can see why someone would want to avoid fighting against another player. Because of this, if there's no "undecided" option my "don't care" vote defaults to PvP flags. Also, with it we'd be able to more clearly see the total population - including a ratio of people who care to people who don't/can't decide.
triad4evr Posted Apr 19, 2011, 5:21 am	I personally think it should be two choices: Do we keep the change to PvP or do we go back to the previous system (PvP flagged in BL and south)? A) Keep the change Revert the change
iceman Posted Apr 19, 2011, 7:36 am	FireFly said: Because grograt, our Johnnynever here (Just making sure everyone knows its him  ) is the only one that complains that the PvP bounties are to expensive and is hoping to get more votes on the subject by sneaking it in there. Previously (obviously they don't teach logic in school these days) avoiding PVP was free via the flag system. Therefore reducing the bounties is a compromise... ...you will find out about compromise if you ever get a girlfriend... ... Oh wait, maybe not then...
iceman Posted Apr 19, 2011, 7:55 am	*Grograt* said: why is there a choice for lower bounty This wouldnt come up on the vote The idea is to determine the two most popular options from many options Then have one chosen by a clear majority It's like a presidential election...
Utredd Posted Apr 19, 2011, 8:17 am	Personally I think PVP should be optional. Having compulsory PVP swings the balance far to far in favour of experienced players that have not had to progress through this new system themselves and are now in a position where it is virtually impossible for newer players to challenge them or indeed protect themselves from them. The "it would never happen" argument i do not feel is valid. All i ask is for the same level playing field that they had. If it goes ahead the game really "finishes" for me at GW, or at least progression south, because i am not prepared to put myself in a position where i am vulnerable to the whims of other players who are vastly better equipped and better trained than myself. It would be great for established players, they would have a huge powerbase that is virtually unobtainable for anyone new moving up. Having the compulsory PVP would completely unbalance the game. Take for example if i wanted to build a camp nr BL. It would be virtually impossible if "the powers that be" decided they didn't want me to have it. I feel that if the positions were reversed, and it was all the ppl who are obviously benefiting and consolidating their postitions from this were new players, there would be no where near the support for the PVP. So it comes down to a yes/no vote for me.. Just a thought
Deathangels Shadow Posted Apr 19, 2011, 8:39 am	Groovelle said: "don't care" or "undecided" I already stated it in another thread, but the above choices exist in every single poll or vote ever made... it's called abstaining.
FireFly Posted Apr 19, 2011, 10:02 am	Utredd said: Personally I think PVP should be optional. Having compulsory PVP swings the balance far to far in favour of experienced players that have not had to progress through this new system themselves and are now in a position where it is virtually impossible for newer players to challenge them or indeed protect themselves from them I just want to remind you, and everyone else that most vets had to progress trough a completely open PvP game, or even when there were restrictions they were much looser than the PvP flag.
*Grograt* gary.r.horder@gmail.com Posted Apr 19, 2011, 10:08 am	Its a hard life being aa vet.
iceman Posted Apr 19, 2011, 10:28 am	d0dger said: Bounties are way too low. They should be increased (for those that can afford it) Added an option to vote for that since you seemed to want one
*Grograt* gary.r.horder@gmail.com Posted Apr 19, 2011, 10:31 am	Seems a futile exercise as Sam has stated I was thinking more along the lines of a yes/no! with the understanding that you need say 60%/65% for a definite answer, anything closer than that would lead to an extended trial and re-vote.
iceman Posted Apr 19, 2011, 10:32 am	FireFly said: I just want to remind you, and everyone else that most vets had to progress trough a completely open PvP game, or even when there were restrictions they were much looser than the PvP flag. I also seem to remember loot was a lot more plentiful and it was easy to flash mob the AI with a bunch of trash trucks... ...as usual your posts are self serving half truths
iceman Posted Apr 19, 2011, 10:37 am	*sam* said: I think polls with too many similar options don't work; you can never really be sure whether the top ranking option was actually the best one, since similar options steal votes from each other. I was thinking more along the lines of a yes/no! with the understanding that you need say 60%/65% for a definite answer, anything closer than that would lead to an extended trial and re-vote. Largely depends on whether you want to get peoples ideas for the best option and give a chance for debate/abuse or just give give people a very limited set of choices based on what you feel like doing doesn't it? Will that be a la carte or set menu sir?
iceman Posted Apr 19, 2011, 10:39 am	*Grograt* said: Seems a futile exercise as Sam has stated I was thinking more along the lines of a yes/no! with the understanding that you need say 60%/65% for a definite answer, anything closer than that would lead to an extended trial and re-vote. Playing DW is a futile exercise - but I'd like to enjoy it as I do it
*Grograt* gary.r.horder@gmail.com Posted Apr 19, 2011, 10:39 am	Hee hee and this entire topic is not derived over your ' smaller bounty ' idea that had hardly any backing in the other thread hmmmm pot calling the kettle black me thinks, when it comes to self serving based on what you feel like doing doesn't it? Last time i looked it was Sams game. be careful all this pushing of the developer, could cause him to say ' bollixs ' to it all, then where would we be, no DW at all, be thankful we have a game with one person running it, that can still be bothered to try and make changes with a ll the flak that is given. me i woulda turned the server of weeks ago
iceman Posted Apr 19, 2011, 10:59 am	*Grograt* said: and this entire topic is not derived over your ' smaller bounty ' idea that had hardly any backing in the other thread Actually it was about framing a poll correctly to get a result that might get popular support Hence the addition of other options that people suggest Dunno, maybe you might get a more popular game that way? More popular game = more pvp for those that want it But why don't you just stick this in locked threads like you usually do...
*Grograt* gary.r.horder@gmail.com Posted Apr 19, 2011, 4:22 pm	Why would i, thats a moderators job, im just a player