Pages: << prev 1, 2, 3, 4 next >>

PvP Zone Expansion Success Criteria

Skidmark The Vermin Racer Slavers Faction Group: Members Posts: 102 Joined: Feb 22, 2010 During the trail period where the PvP-mandatory zones are in place, data is being collected for later review. Which measurements are being taken and how are those measurements going to be evaluated? Which combination of factors might indicate a successful experiment, suggesting that these zones become permanently PvP-mandatory? Which would indicate a failure or a "let's think about this a little more" result? ......................... vet wv pvp5 pvp4 Posted Apr 6, 2011, 5:46 pm

Kornkob The Dude Urban Achievers Darkwind Guru Renegade Group: Subscribers Posts: 1,022 Joined: Jan 10, 2010 Is data being collected? I know I asked for data but I never heard that we'd ever see it. ......................... vet wv Posted Apr 6, 2011, 6:09 pm

*Grograt* Grograts Grunt Heads Darkwind Guru Renegade Group: Marshals Posts: 8,378 Joined: Oct 5, 2008 As stated by Sam in the other thread, after the two week trial it is going to a general forum vote s per the forum discussions on this matter, we will be trialling fully-open pvp in the towns south of, but not including, Gateway. This trial will run from April 6th until April 20th. From April 20th we will hold a well-advertised vote, open to all subscribers, deciding whether to keep this proposed change or not. Majority wins. Should the change be voted down, I will certainly be bringing forward the 'dominant camps' idea instead, in at attempt to offer profitable, consensual pvp to camps. ......................... vet marshal wv community Posted Apr 6, 2011, 6:11 pm Last edited Apr 6, 2011, 6:13 pm by *Grograt*

The Paranoid Tourist Precipitous Treachery Darkwind Guru Slavers Faction Group: Members Posts: 1,828 Joined: Jan 12, 2007 The problem is that the people afraid of PvP are going to stay out of PvP zones for the next two weeks, the people who are pro-PvP are going to keep from doing any PvP for two weeks for fear of upsetting anti-PvP people, and nobody is going to have any reason to change their vote based on any real experience under the new rules. ......................... vet gateautumn gwextrav raceL1 wv e2g0,2,0 Posted Apr 6, 2011, 6:48 pm

Kornkob The Dude Urban Achievers Darkwind Guru Renegade Group: Subscribers Posts: 1,022 Joined: Jan 10, 2010 Which is part of the reason I asked Sam to give us some numbers. I personally feel that part of the problem with this discussion is polarized language used in the discussion. I don't PvP. I'm not afraid of it, I'm just not interested. I'm not changing my behavior--- I just do group scouts in SS because that's about the only place that has regular enough scouts that I get to play with a variety of people. But frequently anyone who is not interested in PvP is lumped in as 'scared' or 'afraid' of PvP and that makes it hard to build consensus because the language used is judgmental. ......................... vet wv Posted Apr 6, 2011, 6:58 pm Last edited Apr 6, 2011, 7:02 pm by Kornkob The Dude

*Grograt* Grograts Grunt Heads Darkwind Guru Renegade Group: Marshals Posts: 8,378 Joined: Oct 5, 2008 Kornkob The Dude said: I personally feel that part of the problem with this discussion is polarized language used in the discussion.  I don't PvP.  I'm not afraid of it, I'm just not interested.  I'm not changing my behavior--- I just do SOLO scouts in SS  But frequently anyone who is not interested in PvP is lumped in as 'scared' or 'afraid' of PvP and that makes it hard to build consensus because the language used is judgmental.  With just one word changed this is basically my thoughts also. ......................... vet marshal wv community Posted Apr 6, 2011, 7:09 pm

Skidmark The Vermin Racer Slavers Faction Group: Members Posts: 102 Joined: Feb 22, 2010 Thanks for the information, Grograt. I missed Sam's post about that because it got locked for some reason. I didn't expect to find important information on the topic in that category. ......................... vet wv pvp5 pvp4 Posted Apr 6, 2011, 8:27 pm

Kornkob The Dude Urban Achievers Darkwind Guru Renegade Group: Subscribers Posts: 1,022 Joined: Jan 10, 2010 There was a client pop-up that said basically the same thing though. ......................... vet wv Posted Apr 6, 2011, 9:27 pm

Joel Autobaun Joels Bastards Darkwind Guru Deathrace Mafia Faction Group: Members Posts: 4,598 Joined: Nov 10, 2008 I think data collection is great, but the most important thing is to vote after the trial run. That requires everyone interested in this debate to vote. Do it. ......................... vet northernsummer deathrce1 raceL1 deathrceL1 ww ped1 sssc paintball semiprocombat ped2 e2g gwextrav gwped combat1 paintladder elmsautumn gateautumn wv race1 combatL1 pvp1 pvp5 pvp4 zom pvp3 circuit1 pvp2 circuit2 circuit3 ss2fl67 slay2013 storm2013 geek triangle198,104,31 Posted Apr 6, 2011, 11:41 pm

*goat starer* Special Circumstances Darkwind Guru Evan Reds Faction Group: Contributors Posts: 10,908 Joined: Oct 29, 2007 although if it hasn't effected you at all please don't choose to vote with your prejudices. ......................... vet wv zom pvp4 cont community deathrceL1 marshal pvp3 pvp2 Posted Apr 6, 2011, 11:51 pm

triad4evr Seekers Racer Renegade Group: Members Posts: 192 Joined: Aug 20, 2009 So, wait, goat, you are saying "You can't vote unless you submit to PvP!" Interesting. ......................... vet wv Posted Apr 7, 2011, 1:54 am

triad4evr Seekers Racer Renegade Group: Members Posts: 192 Joined: Aug 20, 2009 Sorry, goat, I was wrong... you are saying if it hasn't _affected_ me I can't vote. Well, guess what, it has. I now have to avoid Badlands. ......................... vet wv Posted Apr 7, 2011, 2:00 am

*Bastille* Raging Scavengers Darkwind Guru Evan Reds Faction Group: Marshals + Contributors Posts: 7,519 Joined: Mar 31, 2009 Whys that? Give it a go. I dare ya ta drive through there 50 times over the trial period. If you end up losing all your stuff and getting beat up so bad it makes you want to leave, I'll give ya a million bucks. (proof of losses will be required with event IDs  ) Im gunna keep driving through there, and I will probably never get intercepted. If I do, Ill have to run like a girl, and if anyone gets within 150 20m of my car cannons, I'm gunna snog them. I agree with PT's comment above ......................... marshal vet wv pvp4 zom cont pvp32,12,2 Posted Apr 7, 2011, 2:08 am

JS Hitmen Trucking Inc -CI- Darkwind Guru Renegade Group: Members Posts: 3,238 Joined: Jan 9, 2010 The Paranoid Tourist said: The problem is that the people afraid of PvP are going to stay out of PvP zones for the next two weeks, the people who are pro-PvP are going to keep from doing any PvP for two weeks for fear of upsetting anti-PvP people, and nobody is going to have any reason to change their vote based on any real experience under the new rules. Remember that there has been ample chance to PvP this whole time.  Squad challenges have been possible from the beginning.  Consensual, negotiated CR, two players who are ready and willing to PvP.  This change is not about that kind of PvP.  The only "data" pertinent to this change will be that from any intercepts (more/less/intercepts fought/intercepts bountied, were players flagged or not etc).  Intercepts have also been open the whole time for flagged players.  The only actual change this "change" makes is to increase the interceptable squads in the open areas.  This has a potential to increase PvP encounters as much scouting happens in BL, and a decent amount in TX/Sars.  As intercepting is a bit fiddly, and not at all certain it remains to be seen how many more PvP fights this generates, if any.  In reality, the only data that matters is related to any events where an unflagged player is involved.  Which is to say a player who would not have normally been at risk in those areas.  Any Intercepts between flagged players is not pertinent to the question as it can be assumed it would have happened anyway. This change has always been about intercepts, which is just a portion of the PvP issue.  ......................... vet wv pvp5 pvp3 pvp4 Posted Apr 7, 2011, 2:22 am

Thin Izzy Izzys Irregulars Racer Civs Faction Group: Members Posts: 141 Joined: Sep 22, 2009 JS said: This change has always been about intercepts, which is just a portion of the PvP issue.  So, why not revise the PvP intercept algorithm (since that's allegedly the actual problem)?  Then folks who want to intercept/be intercepted would have a decent shot at PvP'ing regularly, those who don't will be able to do their own thing on the PvE side.  Problem solved. ......................... vet wv Posted Apr 7, 2011, 3:11 am

*goat starer* Special Circumstances Darkwind Guru Evan Reds Faction Group: Contributors Posts: 10,908 Joined: Oct 29, 2007 triad4evr said: So, wait, goat, you are saying "You can't vote unless you submit to PvP!" Interesting. no.. i'm saying that if you decide to leave badlands and have absolutely no idea whether it is a hotbed of noob bashing vets in an al out pvp war on the darkwind community OR almost exactly the same as before but with people having teh occasional fun and friendly PVP match then to vote with your predjudices would make you a bit of an idiot. anybody who votes on anything because of what they assume without reference to facts is a bit of an diot.. I'm sure you woudl not like to join the idiot community. ......................... vet wv zom pvp4 cont community deathrceL1 marshal pvp3 pvp2 Posted Apr 7, 2011, 8:03 am

*goat starer* Special Circumstances Darkwind Guru Evan Reds Faction Group: Contributors Posts: 10,908 Joined: Oct 29, 2007 Thin Izzy said: JS said: This change has always been about intercepts, which is just a portion of the PvP issue.  So, why not revise the PvP intercept algorithm (since that's allegedly the actual problem)?  Then folks who want to intercept/be intercepted would have a decent shot at PvP'ing regularly, those who don't will be able to do their own thing on the PvE side.  Problem solved. because its not JUST about the pvp intercept... its about people being able to act in certain ways in certain parts of the game with impunity in other parts of the game... its about the fact that we all play in a game that has scarce resources and some people have been choosing to milk the game without risk... its about this being a post apocalyptic wargame that differs from other games mainly in terms of grit and the past ree years of narrow views and scaremongering gradually eroding the danger of the game ......................... vet wv zom pvp4 cont community deathrceL1 marshal pvp3 pvp2 Posted Apr 7, 2011, 8:08 am

*Bastille* Raging Scavengers Darkwind Guru Evan Reds Faction Group: Marshals + Contributors Posts: 7,519 Joined: Mar 31, 2009 g.o.a.t said: I'm sure you woudl not like to join the idiot community. Guess its just me on my own again then  ......................... marshal vet wv pvp4 zom cont pvp32,12,2 Posted Apr 7, 2011, 8:25 am

Ragnak Ragnaks Reavers Autodueller Renegade Group: Members Posts: 315 Joined: Jul 7, 2010 Thin Izzy said: JS said: This change has always been about intercepts, which is just a portion of the PvP issue.  So, why not revise the PvP intercept algorithm (since that's allegedly the actual problem)?  Then folks who want to intercept/be intercepted would have a decent shot at PvP'ing regularly, those who don't will be able to do their own thing on the PvE side.  Problem solved. There's not a lot of evidence that this is the issue. It is generally thought that, all factors being equal, there's a 50-50 chance for a hit. The other factors are more in a players hand to sway the chances more or less in their direction (e.g. do I use my best scouts to move critical cargo in courier runs, use them to support town scouting, or, now if applicable, use them in interceptor squads). In addition, a PVP guide for intercepting would be extremely useful and should help some interceptors to be more successful in their hunts. On a different note, I would like to suggest that the upcoming poll provide an option to simply state no opinion on the matter of the PVP change and would instead like to have another 2 weeks/4 weeks (some reasonable timeframe) to continue the trial before deciding an outcome. ......................... vet wv Posted Apr 7, 2011, 8:36 am

*Ninesticks* The Wombles Darkwind Guru Renegade Group: Marshals + Rule Council Posts: 3,371 Joined: Apr 11, 2008 Ragnak said: On a different note, I would like to suggest that the upcoming poll provide an option to simply state no opinion on the matter of the PVP change and would instead like to have another 2 weeks/4 weeks (some reasonable timeframe) to continue the trial before deciding an outcome. +1 ......................... vet wv marshal pvp4 community pvp20,1,0 Posted Apr 7, 2011, 9:42 am

Pages: << prev 1, 2, 3, 4 next >>

Powered by MercuryBoard [v1.1.4]
© 2001-2005 The Mercury Development Team

0.1305 seconds - 30 queries - 0.45 load