Search results

We simply won't be able to, because there was never a "no haven" group or control group. You greatly overestimate your importance. I'm glad your high school debate team taught you how to troll forums, but they never taught you that debating just for the sake of debating is pointless.

Any flexibility for tyrants and lunatics?

There is no dev named FarmerJohn xD

FarmerJohn says you're chicken feed.

You're right, you haven't.

When I took my first step out of tindrem and saw a red mounted fighting a grey with a blue jumping in, it was a proof of concept. I knew at the very least that pvp in the game looked very fun. When I got killed I knew it meant that I could get much stronger than I was. I wouldn't have got any...

There’s simply no data to support that haven population supports myrland population. The only thing I have to go off of is the appearance of haven replacing myrland entirely as the main game based on mo 1. If you wanted to play the game with others right now you would do it on haven. We all...

In Soviet Russia, ping normalizes you!

One thing that is bothering me is that people equate an option with nothing or no option. They are indeed different actually. To me its unclear whether the option is statistically different than the no option scenario.

Can you have a healthy ecosystem without the smallest of creatures, plankton and the like? If they are not in the game with us it is indeed taking something away. Would the game have lost something if you found out running your business on Haven was more profitable? I think it would.

You look exactly good enough to be making balance suggestions to me.

I don't think that every haven player will have quit if they started on myrland instead. I think that's actually unlikely.

Its willful.

If it’s an option we will still elect to do what’s most practical or what hurts you the most. You’ll need a more carebear system to solve the emotional problem

Yeah we tried to discuss the implications of a capture system but your boys kept getting hung up on the word tc. I’ll recap I don’t think capture will lessen the emotional impact that you’re referring to, but I also don’t object to it.

Not that simple. The speed effects the length of time that you’re exposed while diving and returning to safety as well as the gain you have on an opponent based on their reaction to their surroundings.

I’m responding in context of the op which talks about capturing a guild stone and how sad every one is when they lose. I’m saying that this capture system won’t change the emotions behind it much. You want to capture keeps sure why not. I’m honestly all for it. My experience with a capture...

Same shit man, if you've captured someone's keep you've also captured their TC. We use the term interchangeably. It doesn't change anything about the discussion a building is a building no matter what system it falls under.

And for how long do you propose the TC is indestructible? One week? One month? or something just remains forever once its built? What if I want to deconstruct my new keep or sell it? Because the MO 1 capture system did these things in theory, we just used it to grief even more and thats all...

As hym said there was a TC capture system already. I think people just felt worse when their TC was captured and taken away from them benefiting the enemy even more. It was actually more of an incentive for sieging because you could deconstruct the buildings for scraps, or keep and use them...