Spell Damage Mitiagation WHEN:

B

Beaver Burgler

Apprentice
wreckognize said:
totally have to agree with you, except I think there was more action at the bridge before, albeit less organized.

problem is, if you got rid of steam and sallos by enforcing razor, people would just go back to EUO and then it's users would have a big advantage over legit players. Better to simply allow steam, and then try to block certain functions.

TBH I liked OP suggestion better when it was a simply damage mitigation for any players in a group that were within a certain # of tiles close to eachother, with the same 50% max decrease for 5 players in the same close vicinity of eachother, regardless of weather or not they were agressed with anyone.

BUT you see, the problem is that the PvP manager is biased because this suggestion interferes with his personal playstyle, so we're just going to have to wait for him to resign before we can have better balanced PvP overall on this shard.
Click to expand...
Except you are also biased. The fact that you prefer not to group up in larger parties/guilds means that eqms's playstyle doesn't suit your play preferences so you are calling foul and trying to force others to play as you do.

UO is a sandbox nobody should be forced to play a specific playstyle.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
 
LoNE WoLF

LoNE WoLF

Master
Beaver Burgler said:
Except you are also biased. The fact that you prefer not to group up in larger parties/guilds means that eqms's playstyle doesn't suit your play preferences so you are calling foul and trying to force others to play as you do.

UO is a sandbox nobody should be forced to play a specific playstyle.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

He doesn't understand the concept of a world outside his pathetic mindset. Ignore his posts. He's a major hypocrite. Wouldn't surprise me if he isn't playing with a full deck.
 
wreckognize

wreckognize

Grandmaster
Beaver Burgler said:
Except you are also biased. The fact that you prefer not to group up in larger parties/guilds means that eqms's playstyle doesn't suit your play preferences so you are calling foul and trying to force others to play as you do.

UO is a sandbox nobody should be forced to play a specific playstyle.
Click to expand...

Yet they're being forced to play in groups because it's such an advantage, and one that has gone unchecked by the game mechanics.

Note that this fix doesn't force players to play solo. It's only trying to balance the two playstyles to make them both viable.

Right, @LoNE WoLF ? lawl
 
W

Winstonian

Grandmaster
wreckognize said:
Yet they're being forced to play in groups because it's such an advantage, and one that has gone unchecked by the game mechanics.

Note that this fix doesn't force players to play solo. It's only trying to balance the two playstyles to make them both viable.

Right, @LoNE WoLF ? lawl
Click to expand...
Huh? How is anyone forced to play in groups?
 
wreckognize

wreckognize

Grandmaster
Winstonian said:
Huh? How is anyone forced to play in groups?
Click to expand...

HuHHH.png~c200
 
wreckognize

wreckognize

Grandmaster
Everything from wanting to be a contender in RDAs or champs, to being able to stay alive in despise level 1 or brit bridge these days. So many other aspects of the game are forcing large group that it's virtually impossible to do well as a solo player. Hell, these guys even roll groups on the poker table these days.
 
B

Beaver Burgler

Apprentice
wreckognize said:
Yet they're being forced to play in groups because it's such an advantage, and one that has gone unchecked by the game mechanics.

Note that this fix doesn't force players to play solo. It's only trying to balance the two playstyles to make them both viable.

Right, @LoNE WoLF ? lawl
Click to expand...
You are not forced to play in a group. Also with your method just don't party up and there is no damage mitigation, glaring whole in a concept that is knee jerk because you want to force people to play as you do.
LoNE WoLF said:
He doesn't understand the concept of a world outside his pathetic mindset. Ignore his posts. He's a major hypocrite. Wouldn't surprise me if he isn't playing with a full deck.
Click to expand...


Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
 
B

Beaver Burgler

Apprentice
wreckognize said:
Everything from wanting to be a contender in RDAs or champs, to being able to stay alive in despise level 1 or brit bridge these days. So many other aspects of the game are forcing large group that it's virtually impossible to do well as a solo player. Hell, these guys even roll groups on the poker table these days.
Click to expand...
How do you define large group? I have been back for 5 months and have hardly seen group fights large than 5 or so on each side (minus champ or rda).

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
 
W

Winstonian

Grandmaster
wreckognize said:
Everything from wanting to be a contender in RDAs or champs, to being able to stay alive in despise level 1 or brit bridge these days. So many other aspects of the game are forcing large group that it's virtually impossible to do well as a solo player. Hell, these guys even roll groups on the poker table these days.
Click to expand...
Garbage.

If you want to solo PvP, you can do that. Duel? You can do that too. Farm? Sure. There's content where groups provide an advantage, but no one is forcing you to participate in those things.
 
wreckognize

wreckognize

Grandmaster
Winstonian said:
Garbage.

If you want to solo PvP, you can do that. Duel? You can do that too. Farm? Sure. There's content where groups provide an advantage, but no one is forcing you to participate in those things.
Click to expand...

lol you're garbage. Wanna duel?? I'll dirt you anytime you want scrub.
 
wreckognize

wreckognize

Grandmaster
Beaver Burgler said:
Stick to your topic and debate it. Don't result to personal attacks and distract from the argument that this is a bad idea.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

All you're asking me to do is repeat myself anyways. I've already pointed out why your argument, that this would force a certain playstyle, is invalid because it doesn't.

 
B

Beaver Burgler

Apprentice
wreckognize said:
All you're asking me to do is repeat myself anyways. I've already pointed out why your argument, that this would force a certain playstyle, is invalid because it doesn't.

Click to expand...
So how does enacting new mechanics that penalizes groups not force groups into a new play style...

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
 
B

Beaver Burgler

Apprentice
Either way your suggeston doesn't even solve what you are complaining about. So there is no point arguing it because when it is implemented you will just complain it's broke.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top