Other > General Game Discussion
Random development
Senocular:
--- Quote from: JovankaB on November 27, 2012, 02:06:03 pm ---The numbers are far from truth. Server is roughly 3x less popular, even if you take alts into consideration, which is a lot, but nothing near 17x less "if you get lucky" like he wrote. I also heard other bullshits from forum morons, like "servur dead 90% are alts". Contrary to forum morons I actually did some research about it and real nuber is from 15% to 30% in extreme situations, usually around 20%-25% (not saying that it's a small number).
If you think 3x and 17x are close to each other then you need to go back to math school.
--- End quote ---
I'm glad we both agreed that 2238 was going downhill from the very beginning, whataver was the rate of it. :)
Ox-Skull:
Considering it used to be called Factions mod, it would have been cool if they focused on fleshing out the various factions as well as adding factions like the SHI or modoc farmers, with a structure like what was started with BOS.
What do the PVP/TC'ers think of random element of raider attack during TC, just some basic lowly raiders trying to score some loot from the ensuing battle. Its guaranteed they'll be wasted, but mid combat they could be a surpise.
Or a faction like the SHI, NPC factions vying for control as well.
Many cool ideas, just none implented/finished. a shame really. :(
T-888:
--- Quote from: Ox-Skull on November 30, 2012, 10:24:28 am ---What do the PVP/TC'ers think of random element of raider attack during TC, just some basic lowly raiders trying to score some loot from the ensuing battle. Its guaranteed they'll be wasted, but mid combat they could be a surpise.
--- End quote ---
This has been already discussed and denied. Factions already use mercenaries, slaves in TC and there are enough random players who try to score some loot from on-going battles while everyone else is distracted. What you are suggesting is already working in practice in way or two, sometimes smaller factions try to engage larger forces opposing each other, thus they can be defined as the raiders you are talking about, players who don't and shouldn't be replaced by npc's.
Levin:
--- Quote from: Ox-Skull on November 30, 2012, 10:24:28 am ---...random element of raider attack during TC, just some basic lowly raiders trying to score some loot from the ensuing battle.
--- End quote ---
--- Quote from: T-888 on November 30, 2012, 11:41:01 am ---What you are suggesting is already working in practice in way or two, sometimes smaller factions try to engage larger forces opposing each other, thus they can be defined as the raiders you are talking about, players who don't and shouldn't be replaced by npc's.
--- End quote ---
Yeah! There is no point to replace The Hawks(they are great as low level raiders) but the other hand, NPCs won't whine on forum board every time they lose. I have to think about it, wait ::)
*thinking*
...ok, replace The Hawks!
T-888:
Here's the thing, all of us have taken the same role at some point of playing this game, it's a matter of being aware of it. The word Raiders can be and is used in this context as the correct post-apocalyptic term witch defines the in game action of those players who don't directly engage, but involves as third party or fourth, and it doesn't matter why or who does it. Just the fact that it happens is enough to understand that there shouldn't be any extra features simulating that what is already there, don't need to fix what is already working fine and etc. etc.
Pointing fingers to a particular faction is utterly useless concerning this subject, actually it is useless about every subject. Players adapt to the game, if something is wrong and isn't working as intended, it's rarely the players fault unless it is something suggested by the players, but in most cases probably bad judgement behind about and or non-existent development. Sometimes things look good on paper, but just doesn't apply good in practice, just a matter of testing. Good example is militia, the first idea of TC was that the players were meant to be the militia, see how well that applied in practice.
Well it didn't, now by your logic, you'd point fingers at players, right? How can they not be militia? How can Hawks not be better and gather more players to play properly because it wasn't meant to be played like that?
Nevermind, i am just messing with you. I was bored. Have a nice day.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version