Lets say i want zen to cost 100 dil, how can I impose this on mysefl?
They never made any commitment to this type of system so it is not their concern. Also, you would need 3 dice to use it. One for the 10% roll, one for rarity (5-sided dice), and one for the particular item. If you roll a 1 for Common and have no commons, then you have to keep rolling until you roll for something you actually have. Equipped equipment must be included in your third dice roll.
As far as the Dilithium Exchange goes, no one controls it just like no one controls the Economy. I would love to buy thousands of dollars of worthless currency today and make it on par with the US dollar tomorrow, but that is not going to happen. If the rate gets to low then Zen sellers will not sell and if the rate gets too high, then Dilithium sellers will not sell.
You haven't answered my question. How is that a benefit to you. I see how it hurts him, I fail to see how hurting someone else is a gain.
In the specific instance mentioned (PVP) It is a zero-sum game, hurting the other side beneits your side.
i could see systems being damaged and Non-functional tll repaired (Or minimally functional, lose your warp core and you can't get back to repair after all!) But deleting stuff? Sorry but that is not "adding realism" that is Punishing players.
In the specific instance mentioned (PVP) It is a zero-sum game, hurting the other side beneits your side.
i could see systems being damaged and Non-functional tll repaired (Or minimally functional, lose your warp core and you can't get back to repair after all!) But deleting stuff? Sorry but that is not "adding realism" that is Punishing players.
Yes, but he isn't asking for damage or temporary non-function. He asking for a permanent loss for his opponent.
Other then some form of metaphorical teabagging I don't see why someone would want that.
It's not myfault ifyoufeel trolledbymyDisco ball...Sorry'boutit.
I would accept a system where ship repairs always cost dil, and dying in PvP had a 100% chance of causing some kind of ship damage.
Why Cost Dilithium? YOu may believe that we need an additional DIL sink, but I'm not convinced (EC's on the other hand, yeah, but that would be a different thread). WHY Is a DIL sink needed? (Hint: Because i say/think so is not a valid argument)
The global aim of this global solution is to reduce the crushing burden of the price of zen, eliminate the ennui inherent in any system with no stakes, and bring about a bright new day for the game.
Improving PvP is ONE SMALL BENEFIT out of MANY BROAD BENEFITS. Your fixation on it blinds you to the bigger picture. Let it go, its ok.
I50-160 is hardly a crushing burden, and if you think it is then you are doing it wrong.
It's not myfault ifyoufeel trolledbymyDisco ball...Sorry'boutit.
In the broadest sense, one definition of "more" is "better," so it is good in itself to have more.
In the miniscule and tiny world of PvP, which is a competition, having more gives you a competitive advantage which improves your chance of winning, and in a competition like the nano-scale world of PvP, winning is EVERYTHING.
But you don't get more. You just make other people have less.
Why is that good?
You obvously did not read the first message, or have already forgotten it. The original argument was that it was a fainely balanced PVP Match... You know, the sort folks claim they want, equivalent gear and ships where skill and a little good fortune determined the winner.
HOWEVER, once player was destroyed (as will happen in PVP) and loses a piece of gear. his ship is now qualitatively inferior ro his oponent, and the match continues with the now inferior player suffering a handicap.
BY DEFENITION handicapping one player is benefitting the other in thissort of ZERO SUM situation.
It is really that simple, (X-1<X)=(X>X-1)
Assuming therefore that they began in the same place the player who lost capability is less capable/effective than the player who did not lose anything, Therefore the player who did not lose something is now superior.
In the miniscule PvP community, it would improve the experience for PvPers.
I'm pretty sure those certain PvP'ers who use every exclusive console and cheese in the game as a crutch would have something to say about that. Never mind the fact most of them hate losing already, never mind the chance for said toys to randomly disappear.
In the broadest sense, one definition of "more" is "better," so it is good in itself to have more.
In the miniscule and tiny world of PvP, which is a competition, having more gives you a competitive advantage which improves your chance of winning, and in a competition like the nano-scale world of PvP, winning is EVERYTHING.
Ok then. What benefit to pvp would item destruction have over temporary disablement?
It's not myfault ifyoufeel trolledbymyDisco ball...Sorry'boutit.
My concerns are altruistic. I myself have and can generate huge amounts of dil because I am such a productive player, but it isn't me I'm worried about, I am covered in gravy, I will be fine one way or another.
My motives are altruistic, I am seeking global solutions for global problems, a problem that affects the Workingman, not people like me.
I think people like me have an obligation to help the workingman don't you?
In this instance, your help is neither required nor desired.
And this is coming from a "Working man."
It's not myfault ifyoufeel trolledbymyDisco ball...Sorry'boutit.
Comments
They never made any commitment to this type of system so it is not their concern. Also, you would need 3 dice to use it. One for the 10% roll, one for rarity (5-sided dice), and one for the particular item. If you roll a 1 for Common and have no commons, then you have to keep rolling until you roll for something you actually have. Equipped equipment must be included in your third dice roll.
As far as the Dilithium Exchange goes, no one controls it just like no one controls the Economy. I would love to buy thousands of dollars of worthless currency today and make it on par with the US dollar tomorrow, but that is not going to happen. If the rate gets to low then Zen sellers will not sell and if the rate gets too high, then Dilithium sellers will not sell.
You haven't answered my question. How is that a benefit to you. I see how it hurts him, I fail to see how hurting someone else is a gain.
R.I.P. Leonard Nimoy
In the specific instance mentioned (PVP) It is a zero-sum game, hurting the other side beneits your side.
i could see systems being damaged and Non-functional tll repaired (Or minimally functional, lose your warp core and you can't get back to repair after all!) But deleting stuff? Sorry but that is not "adding realism" that is Punishing players.
Yes, but he isn't asking for damage or temporary non-function. He asking for a permanent loss for his opponent.
Other then some form of metaphorical teabagging I don't see why someone would want that.
R.I.P. Leonard Nimoy
Why Cost Dilithium? YOu may believe that we need an additional DIL sink, but I'm not convinced (EC's on the other hand, yeah, but that would be a different thread). WHY Is a DIL sink needed? (Hint: Because i say/think so is not a valid argument)
But you don't get more. You just make other people have less.
Why is that good?
R.I.P. Leonard Nimoy
Its just being spiteful and vindictive.
I know, but I'm trying to get him to admit it.
R.I.P. Leonard Nimoy
Why does having more then other people matter? This is what I want you to tell me.
R.I.P. Leonard Nimoy
I50-160 is hardly a crushing burden, and if you think it is then you are doing it wrong.
R.I.P. Leonard Nimoy
There is a big assumption you are making.
Some pvpers.
but for the majority it would drive them away and make this games already anemic pvp community practically non-existent.
R.I.P. Leonard Nimoy
You obvously did not read the first message, or have already forgotten it. The original argument was that it was a fainely balanced PVP Match... You know, the sort folks claim they want, equivalent gear and ships where skill and a little good fortune determined the winner.
HOWEVER, once player was destroyed (as will happen in PVP) and loses a piece of gear. his ship is now qualitatively inferior ro his oponent, and the match continues with the now inferior player suffering a handicap.
BY DEFENITION handicapping one player is benefitting the other in thissort of ZERO SUM situation.
It is really that simple, (X-1<X)=(X>X-1)
Assuming therefore that they began in the same place the player who lost capability is less capable/effective than the player who did not lose anything, Therefore the player who did not lose something is now superior.
I'm pretty sure those certain PvP'ers who use every exclusive console and cheese in the game as a crutch would have something to say about that. Never mind the fact most of them hate losing already, never mind the chance for said toys to randomly disappear.
Ok then. What benefit to pvp would item destruction have over temporary disablement?
R.I.P. Leonard Nimoy
In this instance, your help is neither required nor desired.
And this is coming from a "Working man."
R.I.P. Leonard Nimoy