There's a big difference in a battlezone and a full on STF. To try to compare the 2 in the way you have is a strawman argument. As I've said from the start, is it a jerk move to camp, yes it is, BUT they aren't breaking any rules by doing so. People come and go in battlezones. I'm not opposed to making changes to address this, but by no means is someone owed anything in the battlezones. I also have no problem with the teleporting to the command center thing. Camping is not an exploit and to compare it to exploiting is ridiculous.
Technically speaking it is an exploit as campers are exploiting the hard work done by players capturing points and taking advantage of the higher reward structure of the map by only participating in this part of the mission. So it is exploiting from a certain perspective.
Dino tagging wasn't a good system and did not make the map work. It is the other way arround. Map layout and reward system helped dino tagging. Suppose everybody does it. All players shoot at the dino and move on to the next one. The scientist will probably take the silo and you loose the map. Even at the miraculous circumstance that each group tags and moves to the next one killing the third and last one costs you travel time.
Upping dino hp isn't a solution either. It is supposed to be a level 50 zone. My suggestion is let the dino's spawn each after another so everybody can make a full score. Also give rewards for taking points and a bonus on top of it when you kill the dino. The more you work, the bigger the reward is. I do not understand why it is so difficult it is to make it work in the game. Or do they want a game that is also satisfying for freeriders, cheaters and exploiters? Is that their business model? The anti social players must also have a place even at the expence of the social player? A customer is a customer, money is money?
Dino tagging wasn't a good system and did not make the map work. It is the other way arround. Map layout and reward system helped dino tagging. Suppose everybody does it. All players shoot at the dino and move on to the next one. The scientist will probably take the silo and you loose the map. Even at the miraculous circumstance that each group tags and moves to the next one killing the third and last one costs you travel time.
Upping dino hp isn't a solution either. It is supposed to be a level 50 zone. My suggestion is let the dino's spawn each after another so everybody can make a full score. Also give rewards for taking points and a bonus on top of it when you kill the dino. The more you work, the bigger the reward is. I do not understand why it is so difficult it is to make it work in the game. Or do they want a game that is also satisfying for freeriders, cheaters and exploiters? Is that their business model? The anti social players must also have a place even at the expence of the social player? A customer is a customer, money is money?
Tagging was, if you understood the system, a very social event. The whole instance needed to coordinate to make sure the rotation allows for each spawn to effectively be tagged and then fought to avoid defeat. I was a very extensive BZ player and I rarely witnessed a fail because after some time more or less everyone got the concept and if not they'd ask about it and you could point them to it.
The way the Dyson BZ is designed is not optimal, I grant you that. The reinforcement mark thingies being dropped like a burst piñata is a really stupid move as that can literally lead to people grabbing rewards for not doing something. Complaining about the tagging though is misdirected anger as the whole tagging deal was a lot more social and tactical than everyone standing around and shooting the big mob.
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
Dino tagging wasn't a good system and did not make the map work. It is the other way arround. Map layout and reward system helped dino tagging. Suppose everybody does it. All players shoot at the dino and move on to the next one. The scientist will probably take the silo and you loose the map. Even at the miraculous circumstance that each group tags and moves to the next one killing the third and last one costs you travel time.
Upping dino hp isn't a solution either. It is supposed to be a level 50 zone. My suggestion is let the dino's spawn each after another so everybody can make a full score. Also give rewards for taking points and a bonus on top of it when you kill the dino. The more you work, the bigger the reward is. I do not understand why it is so difficult it is to make it work in the game. Or do they want a game that is also satisfying for freeriders, cheaters and exploiters? Is that their business model? The anti social players must also have a place even at the expence of the social player? A customer is a customer, money is money?
It maybe a level 50 zone but 2 years ago when it was released you didn't have Mk XIV Epic ground gear or any of the various traits , set abilities, or kit modules higher that XII unlike now which don't seem to scale down to the old Mk XII VR which would have been the best you could do 2 years ago.
Easiest to implement solution would be a mass beam of players from their location to the command center with a say 30sec window before players can exit to combat the dinos to account for server lag, load screens, etc.. presuming they care at all since the zone hasnt really changed majorly since release [irrc] other than tagging dinos was changed to camping dinos it seems.
Technically speaking it is an exploit as campers are exploiting the hard work done by players capturing points and taking advantage of the higher reward structure of the map by only participating in this part of the mission. So it is exploiting from a certain perspective.
I honestly hope you tried to quote me and just screwed up the coding for the quote. Otherwise that would be a pretty desperate attempt to make it look like I said something else.
With that in mind as I've said elsewhere, camping is not against the rules. There is nothing about a battlezone that specifically says you're not allowed to camp. Yes we can say it's a jerk move to intentionally camp. It's also not an exploit nor is it theft. Arguments such as that are so far beyond ridiculous that even Q himself wouldn't be able to wrap his mind around it.
As I've said to others, no one is owed anything in the battlezones. Once the dinos spawn if people can make it to the dino in time then they get rewards, which at the moment also includes the campers. Now we can argue for change to the system to discourage camping and the structure of those changes are something we can all argue. However lets keep it realistic. Battlezones are open ended places where people come and go all the time. It's certainly not an exploit and it's certainly not theft either as no one owns anything in that zone. I don't like leeches anymore than the next guy but I also believe in sticking with reality which is what I'm not seeing by alot of folks here.
"Someone once told me that time was a predator that stalked us all our lives. I rather believe that time is a companion who goes with us on the journey and reminds us to cherish every moment, because it will never come again." - Jean Luc Picard in Star Trek Generations
Darkbladejk seems to be throwing around the word "entitlement" an awful lot, but guess what? Someone who has done all the work to trigger the T-Rex SHOULD BE entitled to the rewards for it. So, dbjk, if people are sounding entitled, it is because THEY ARE ENTITLED.
Throwing the word around like it is bad doesn't really show a true appreciation of what the word means. It's like the word DISCRIMINATION. Oooh... A bad thing, right? No, we discriminate all the time. If I'm going hiking, I'm going to react differently to meeting another hiker on the trail than if it were a bear. On that same hike, which would be the more appropriate subject for a picture I might take? The view from the mountain summit, or the dead squirrel I found along the trail? Discrimination, we use it all the time. Same with entitlement.
"Logic is a little tweeting bird chirping in a meadow. Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers which smell BAD." - Spock
Darkbladejk seems to be throwing around the word "entitlement" an awful lot, but guess what? Someone who has done all the work to trigger the T-Rex SHOULD BE entitled to the rewards for it. So, dbjk, if people are sounding entitled, it is because THEY ARE ENTITLED.
Throwing the word around like it is bad doesn't really show a true appreciation of what the word means. It's like the word DISCRIMINATION. Oooh... A bad thing, right? No, we discriminate all the time. If I'm going hiking, I'm going to react differently to meeting another hiker on the trail than if it were a bear. On that same hike, which would be the more appropriate subject for a picture I might take? The view from the mountain summit, or the dead squirrel I found along the trail? Discrimination, we use it all the time. Same with entitlement.
I call it what it is, entitlement, aka the feeling you're owed something when you're not. The current structure allows for everyone in the zone to get the reward, not just the guy that soloed half the place himself. Yes at the moment that includes campers as much as none of us may like it. You have just as much chance as anyone else to get the dino when it spawns. You're not a special snowflake that the rest of the zone should have to wait on because, oh i spawned the dino now you owe it to me to let me shoot it. There are more people in the zone than just you. At this point if all you can do is argue semantics then you must be out of steam already.
It's the same in every battlezone, if you can get there quick enough, then you can tag the boss and get rewards. As I've said to others, learn the routes and use the tools available to you and 99% of the time it will be a non-issue. You're going to get into one of those zones from time to time where the dinos drop faster than a sack of bricks in a lake, it comes with the territory of the dyson zone. If you can't deal with that then you don't need to run the zone.
"Someone once told me that time was a predator that stalked us all our lives. I rather believe that time is a companion who goes with us on the journey and reminds us to cherish every moment, because it will never come again." - Jean Luc Picard in Star Trek Generations
Darkbladejk seems to be throwing around the word "entitlement" an awful lot, but guess what? Someone who has done all the work to trigger the T-Rex SHOULD BE entitled to the rewards for it. So, dbjk, if people are sounding entitled, it is because THEY ARE ENTITLED.
Throwing the word around like it is bad doesn't really show a true appreciation of what the word means. It's like the word DISCRIMINATION. Oooh... A bad thing, right? No, we discriminate all the time. If I'm going hiking, I'm going to react differently to meeting another hiker on the trail than if it were a bear. On that same hike, which would be the more appropriate subject for a picture I might take? The view from the mountain summit, or the dead squirrel I found along the trail? Discrimination, we use it all the time. Same with entitlement.
I call it what it is, entitlement, aka the feeling you're owed something when you're not. The current structure allows for everyone in the zone to get the reward, not just the guy that soloed half the place himself. Yes at the moment that includes campers as much as none of us may like it.
Meaning the current structure is flawed, which is one of the reasons why this thread was created. You're defending a situation that you admit you don't agree with. That's a bit confusing tbh.
You have just as much chance as anyone else to get the dino when it spawns.
[/quote]
And this is simply not true. Indeed, the fact that it's not true (due to campers) is the whole reason why people are annoyed with how things are organised in this zone. And rightfully so, as you have admitted yourself.
en·ti·tle·ment inˈtīdlmənt,enˈtīdlmənt/ noun the fact of having a right to something. "full entitlement to fees and maintenance should be offered" synonyms: right, prerogative, claim
Entitlement doesn't have anything to do with "feeling you're owed something when you're not" as you put it.
Someone else compared the spawn campers to someone doing nothing in a PvE queue until the end and getting the same reward as you.
They were wrong.
It is like someone doing nothing in a PvE queue until the end, resulting in those who fought the fight getting an AFK penalty.
"Logic is a little tweeting bird chirping in a meadow. Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers which smell BAD." - Spock
Darkbladejk seems to be throwing around the word "entitlement" an awful lot, but guess what? Someone who has done all the work to trigger the T-Rex SHOULD BE entitled to the rewards for it. So, dbjk, if people are sounding entitled, it is because THEY ARE ENTITLED.
Throwing the word around like it is bad doesn't really show a true appreciation of what the word means. It's like the word DISCRIMINATION. Oooh... A bad thing, right? No, we discriminate all the time. If I'm going hiking, I'm going to react differently to meeting another hiker on the trail than if it were a bear. On that same hike, which would be the more appropriate subject for a picture I might take? The view from the mountain summit, or the dead squirrel I found along the trail? Discrimination, we use it all the time. Same with entitlement.
Indeed. Funny how everyone keeps trying to kill all debates and topics of discussion by claiming that another poster is feeling 'entitled'. As if there cannot be good reasons to feel entitled in certain instances.
It's a bit similar with the word 'nerf' really. Just by saying that someone's proposing a nerf to something, they think they've made a point. Which simply isn't true. Throwing around words that have a bad connotation in an effort to kill a discussion seems to be an effective strategy, unfortunetaly.
Meaning the current structure is flawed, which is one of the reasons why this thread was created. You're defending a situation that you admit you don't agree with. That's a bit confusing tbh.
I'm not defending camping by any means. what I am saying is that it's not breaking the rules as some people are suggesting. there is a big difference between the 2. We can argue structure of the zone all day long and that's cool. However there are a great deal of erroneous arguments going on and that is what I'm calling shenanigans on.
And this is simply not true. Indeed, the fact that it's not true (due to campers) is the whole reason why people are annoyed with how things are organised in this zone. And rightfully so, as you have admitted yourself.
In no way are the campers denying you anything. That is one of the erroneous arguments being made here. Like I said learn the routes and use the tools available and you can make it to the dino. It's also a fallacy to suggest that just the campers are the problem. If enough folks are in say the City and they make it to the dino, they can nuke it stupid fast. I'm not opposed to changes to reduce or even eliminate camping. I do find it ridiculous however for people to behave as though they're owed something when they're not.
en·ti·tle·ment
inˈtīdlmənt,enˈtīdlmənt/
noun
the fact of having a right to something.
"full entitlement to fees and maintenance should be offered"
synonyms: right, prerogative, claim
Entitlement doesn't have anything to do with "feeling you're owed something when you're not" as you put it.
Someone else compared the spawn campers to someone doing nothing in a PvE queue until the end and getting the same reward as you.
They were wrong.
It is like someone doing nothing in a PvE queue until the end, resulting in those who fought the fight getting an AFK penalty.
Apparently you were incapable of understanding what entitlement mentality is. Entitlement mentality is when someone thinks they have a right to something, or a claim on something. In the instance I've used the term, people feel they have a claim to something when they don't.
Indeed. Funny how everyone keeps trying to kill all debates and topics of discussion by claiming that another poster is feeling 'entitled'. As if there cannot be good reasons to feel entitled in certain instances.
It's a bit similar with the word 'nerf' really. Just by saying that someone's proposing a nerf to something, they think they've made a point. Which simply isn't true. Throwing around words that have a bad connotation in an effort to kill a discussion seems to be an effective strategy, unfortunetaly.
When someone behaves as though they have a right to something or a claim to something and folks should be required to wait on them, if you don't call it entitlement mentality then what do you suggest we call it? If the shoe fits then that's what I'm going to call it. As I said above, I'm not opposed to discussion. What I am opposed to is people thinking they're owed something when they're not. There are more people in the zones aside from them.
"Someone once told me that time was a predator that stalked us all our lives. I rather believe that time is a companion who goes with us on the journey and reminds us to cherish every moment, because it will never come again." - Jean Luc Picard in Star Trek Generations
Meaning the current structure is flawed, which is one of the reasons why this thread was created. You're defending a situation that you admit you don't agree with. That's a bit confusing tbh.
I'm not defending camping by any means. what I am saying is that it's not breaking the rules as some people are suggesting. there is a big difference between the 2. We can argue structure of the zone all day long and that's cool. However there are a great deal of erroneous arguments going on and that is what I'm calling shenanigans on.
And this is simply not true. Indeed, the fact that it's not true (due to campers) is the whole reason why people are annoyed with how things are organised in this zone. And rightfully so, as you have admitted yourself.
In no way are the campers denying you anything. That is one of the erroneous arguments being made here. Like I said learn the routes and use the tools available and you can make it to the dino. It's also a fallacy to suggest that just the campers are the problem. If enough folks are in say the City and they make it to the dino, they can nuke it stupid fast. I'm not opposed to changes to reduce or even eliminate camping. I do find it ridiculous however for people to behave as though they're owed something when they're not.
en·ti·tle·ment
inˈtīdlmənt,enˈtīdlmənt/
noun
the fact of having a right to something.
"full entitlement to fees and maintenance should be offered"
synonyms: right, prerogative, claim
Entitlement doesn't have anything to do with "feeling you're owed something when you're not" as you put it.
Someone else compared the spawn campers to someone doing nothing in a PvE queue until the end and getting the same reward as you.
They were wrong.
It is like someone doing nothing in a PvE queue until the end, resulting in those who fought the fight getting an AFK penalty.
Apparently you were incapable of understanding what entitlement mentality is. Entitlement mentality is when someone thinks they have a right to something, or a claim on something. In the instance I've used the term, people feel they have a claim to something when they don't.
Indeed. Funny how everyone keeps trying to kill all debates and topics of discussion by claiming that another poster is feeling 'entitled'. As if there cannot be good reasons to feel entitled in certain instances.
It's a bit similar with the word 'nerf' really. Just by saying that someone's proposing a nerf to something, they think they've made a point. Which simply isn't true. Throwing around words that have a bad connotation in an effort to kill a discussion seems to be an effective strategy, unfortunetaly.
When someone behaves as though they have a right to something or a claim to something and folks should be required to wait on them, if you don't call it entitlement mentality then what do you suggest we call it? If the shoe fits then that's what I'm going to call it. As I said above, I'm not opposed to discussion. What I am opposed to is people thinking they're owed something when they're not. There are more people in the zones aside from them.
The campers are denying those who work for their reward a lot. Like I said, the dino was down in mere seconds, there was no way to reach it in time, even with frosted boots, even by taking the shortest route from the point I was capturing to the silo. How is that 'not denying' me (and others) anything if they make it impossible to get there in time? It's not an erroneous argument, if you think it is, then you're basically saying that I'm lying. Which I'm not, and the same goes, most likely, for the others who have confirmed the existence of this problem.
And we can argue all day whether we have the right to get the reward, but let's assume for the moment that actually playing the game should be rewarded (as is the case in most other parts of the game, especially the queues - the AFK penalty was mentioned for a reason) and that not playing the game and just standing near a certain spot and then shoot at an enemy while they've done literally nothing to make it spawn should not grant rewards. Sounds reasonable, right? Then it seems clear to me that the current structure isn't working since it gives those who are willing to actually play the game a lower reward, thus they are at a disadvantage, resulting in conflicts and increasingly unwillingness to actually play that zone to make the dino spawn (edit: which is probably another reason why camping has become a much more serious issue - the fact that 'tagging' is no longer possible cannot entirely explain this trend).
There are indeed more people in that zone, but if the majority is not making themselves useful in any way, why should they be given a reward? One might as well argue that anyone who's opposed to changing the way things work, that they in fact are suffering from this 'entitlement mentality' since they basically want to keep earning rewards for not helping out.
I call it what it is, entitlement, aka the feeling you're owed something when you're not. The current structure allows for everyone in the zone to get the reward, not just the guy that soloed half the place himself. Yes at the moment that includes campers as much as none of us may like it. You have just as much chance as anyone else to get the dino when it spawns. You're not a special snowflake that the rest of the zone should have to wait on because, oh i spawned the dino now you owe it to me to let me shoot it. There are more people in the zone than just you. At this point if all you can do is argue semantics then you must be out of steam already.
It's the same in every battlezone, if you can get there quick enough, then you can tag the boss and get rewards. As I've said to others, learn the routes and use the tools available to you and 99% of the time it will be a non-issue. You're going to get into one of those zones from time to time where the dinos drop faster than a sack of bricks in a lake, it comes with the territory of the dyson zone. If you can't deal with that then you don't need to run the zone.
All this talk talk talk is you trying to present in neutral language your personal philosophy about camping, to give the illusion that you're approaching it from a position of objectivity. It's like when people who shamelessly pirate video games, software and movies talk in very neutral terms about how "the greed of the industry has made it necessary for people to pirate their content" when you get down to it, their reasons for pirating comes down to, "Why buy something when I can just torrent it for free?"
That's all you're doing. You're doing a good job of referring to campers in the third person and pretending to be an objective observer of all this, but it's obvious that you're a camper yourself who camps for the same reason they all do: "Hmmm, I just figured out that I don't have to spend a half hour grinding to help capture zones. Hey, I know! While the stupid suckers do the honorable thing and work together to complete the map like they should, I'll just camp out here and wait for the dinos to spawn and reap all the benefits for only three minutes of work. Because you see, I have no sense of fair play. I don't feel I should have to do any work to get all of this dilithium, and I think it's perfectly okay to leech off the hard work of other players."
Admit that this is what camping boils down for you, but please stop insulting everyone's intelligence with your carefully-worded "neutral" responses. This has nothing to do with the way the BZ works or people's alleged sense of entitlement or whatever justification you keep coming up with for camping. This has to do with you and your philosophy about game playing. You don't believe in fair play, period. If you don't believe in it, that's fine, but at least have the courage to stand by your convictions rather than pretending that you're just some independent, clear-thinking, neutral observer who just happens to be taking the side of campers. You ARE a camper, and you think there's nothing wrong with it.
My Foundry Mission--Name: Falling Star | Mission ID: HQIH36HAW | Faction: FED
DRJK, you are claiming that those who do the work have no rights to the reward. I think if we asked the Devs who designed the VBZ, they would say that was not their intent. The only players with an entitlement mentality, as described by you, are the campers. They did not work for the end result, yet they reap the rewards. If this was the Devs' intent, that is just plain poor game design. Why intentionally make a piece of content that is going to be frustrating enough that people just won't play it? Waste of time. No, the intent was for those participating in the BZ to have one big fight at the end with a good payout.
By the way, seeing as the game's ToS explicitly forbid the disruption of normal, intended game play (section 14 or 15 IIRC), camping isn't only a jerky thing to do, it is technically against the rules, if read from a completely legalistic direction.
"Logic is a little tweeting bird chirping in a meadow. Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers which smell BAD." - Spock
The campers are denying those who work for their reward a lot. Like I said, the dino was down in mere seconds, there was no way to reach it in time, even with frosted boots, even by taking the shortest route from the point I was capturing to the silo. How is that 'not denying' me (and others) anything if they make it impossible to get there in time? It's not an erroneous argument, if you think it is, then you're basically saying that I'm lying. Which I'm not, and the same goes, most likely, for the others who have confirmed the existence of this problem.
And we can argue all day whether we have the right to get the reward, but let's assume for the moment that actually playing the game should be rewarded (as is the case in most other parts of the game, especially the queues - the AFK penalty was mentioned for a reason) and that not playing the game and just standing near a certain spot and then shoot at an enemy while they've done literally nothing to make it spawn should not grant rewards. Sounds reasonable, right? Then it seems clear to me that the current structure isn't working since it gives those who are willing to actually play the game a lower reward, thus they are at a disadvantage, resulting in conflicts and increasingly unwillingness to actually play that zone to make the dino spawn (edit: which is probably another reason why camping has become a much more serious issue - the fact that 'tagging' is no longer possible cannot entirely explain this trend).
There are indeed more people in that zone, but if the majority is not making themselves useful in any way, why should they be given a reward? One might as well argue that anyone who's opposed to changing the way things work, that they in fact are suffering from this 'entitlement mentality' since they basically want to keep earning rewards for not helping out.
They aren't denying you a thing save in your mind. As I've already explained several times, the dinos are intended to be for anyone in the zone to shoot at. In this current form yes this includes the campers. Does that make it right, no it doesn't. I understand what you're saying that you couldn't get there in time. What I'm telling you is that sometimes that will happen in the Dyson zone and you're overreacting. Yes it sucks, yes it's a jerk move by the folks who camp, yes the zone can use a facelift and a restructuring while they're at it. Bottom line is it's going to happen from time to time, be it the Dyson zone or some other place in the game such as a red alert, that stuff gets nuked before you can get there. That's just a fact of the game and if you can't stand that you don't need to be in the zone.
The AFK penalty is irrelevant in the case of a battlezone. People come and go all the time in the zone and very rarely will you have 100% of the same team you started with when the zone flips. Suppose a person caps all but the last zone by himself and is forced to drop from the zone due to a concern outside the game. Should the person(s) who replace him not be allowed to get the dinos? Or another example, suppose someone caps a couple of zones or even one, and is forced to afk due to something beyond their control. Suppose as well they return just as the dinos spawn, should they be discounted from getting the rewards? Actually disallowing the tagging like what we had before had far more consequences than you think it did. Before hand as others have pointed out, folks would rotate between the 3 dinos getting in their tags and settle at the last dino in their rotation. When this was going on it gave everyone a chance to tag the dinos and it gave people a reason to coordinate. Why would they settle for just one or 2 when with a little coordination you could guarantee full rewards for the entire zone? No the removal of tagging isn't the only factor but it is one of the major ones. Since level 60 wasn't a thing when the Dyson zone was introduced, you now have level 60s coming into a zone meant for 50s that are packing gear that's 10 levels above what the zone was originally intended for. In other words the removal of tagging along with a few other factors created an every man for himself type of thinking down there. When you remove reasons for folks in the zone to coordinate and use teamwork, things tend to go bonkers like we're seeing today.
Like I said camping is a jerk move, no one is debating that. We can debate how a structure change should work and if one is needed all day long and that's perfectly cool. There is a big difference in arguing from a place of feeling you're owed something and arguing for the betterment of the zone. When you argue along the lines of "I helped spawn the dinos therefore I have a right to shoot them, and you owe it me to let me get there," you argue from feeling owed something, which you're not. When you argue from the stance of "I don't think it's fair under the current structure and I think it should be changed to give everyone an equal starting chance at the dino," then that's cool. If you want to get teamwork going, then give people a reason to want to help out. Give people a reason to want to team and so on. As it sits right now, those reasons and motivations don't exist anymore.
"Someone once told me that time was a predator that stalked us all our lives. I rather believe that time is a companion who goes with us on the journey and reminds us to cherish every moment, because it will never come again." - Jean Luc Picard in Star Trek Generations
Don't forget "the game mechanic permits it, so it's perfectly ok for me to act like a greedy, self-absorbed sociopath".
That one never gets old.
Yes, I caught that, too. I think he said something along the lines of, "It's okay to do it because there are no rules against it." This is like when a supermarket hands out free samples and someone grabs enough to feed a family of four based on the logic of, "Well, it's okay if I take 15 samples because the store didn't say there were any limits to how many I could take. And besides, everyone else is free to grab 15-20 samples just like me, so what is everyone complaining about?"
My Foundry Mission--Name: Falling Star | Mission ID: HQIH36HAW | Faction: FED
The campers are denying those who work for their reward a lot. Like I said, the dino was down in mere seconds, there was no way to reach it in time, even with frosted boots, even by taking the shortest route from the point I was capturing to the silo. How is that 'not denying' me (and others) anything if they make it impossible to get there in time? It's not an erroneous argument, if you think it is, then you're basically saying that I'm lying. Which I'm not, and the same goes, most likely, for the others who have confirmed the existence of this problem.
And we can argue all day whether we have the right to get the reward, but let's assume for the moment that actually playing the game should be rewarded (as is the case in most other parts of the game, especially the queues - the AFK penalty was mentioned for a reason) and that not playing the game and just standing near a certain spot and then shoot at an enemy while they've done literally nothing to make it spawn should not grant rewards. Sounds reasonable, right? Then it seems clear to me that the current structure isn't working since it gives those who are willing to actually play the game a lower reward, thus they are at a disadvantage, resulting in conflicts and increasingly unwillingness to actually play that zone to make the dino spawn (edit: which is probably another reason why camping has become a much more serious issue - the fact that 'tagging' is no longer possible cannot entirely explain this trend).
There are indeed more people in that zone, but if the majority is not making themselves useful in any way, why should they be given a reward? One might as well argue that anyone who's opposed to changing the way things work, that they in fact are suffering from this 'entitlement mentality' since they basically want to keep earning rewards for not helping out.
There is a big difference in arguing from a place of feeling you're owed something and arguing for the betterment of the zone. When you argue along the lines of "I helped spawn the dinos therefore I have a right to shoot them, and you owe it me to let me get there," you argue from feeling owed something, which you're not. When you argue from the stance of "I don't think it's fair under the current structure and I think it should be changed to give everyone an equal starting chance at the dino," then that's cool. If you want to get teamwork going, then give people a reason to want to help out. Give people a reason to want to team and so on. As it sits right now, those reasons and motivations don't exist anymore.
Funny... my first post in this thread, the opening post, was calling for exactly that: what is wrong with this zone, and a fix to this zone. With a suggestion how to do it. In fact, the first page of this thread has multiple suggestions by various people and then you started the debate about entitlement simply because you didn't seem to like one specific suggestion. So in fact you admit that you derailed a thread just because you didn't like the wording of one specific suggestion.
From one of your first replies:
yes it's a jerk move to camp, but you can't force people to go out and help cap.
and
Also the argument could be made, why should everyone else have to wait on you to get there just because you went off to the boonies of the zone.
And then when I start explaining why campers should wait, or better, why camping should be made impossible by adding forcefields and a timer, you launch this 'entitlement' thing against a perfectly reasonable solution as it would fix the problem of V'rexes being insta-killed, - another problem whose existence you keep denying just because you can -. While you keep saying that you think camping is a bad thing, you keep defending it. The quote 'you can't force people to go out and help cap' is enough proof of that.
All this talk talk talk is you trying to present in neutral language your personal philosophy about camping, to give the illusion that you're approaching it from a position of objectivity. It's like when people who shamelessly pirate video games, software and movies talk in very neutral terms about how "the greed of the industry has made it necessary for people to pirate their content" when you get down to it, their reasons for pirating comes down to, "Why buy something when I can just torrent it for free?"
That's all you're doing. You're doing a good job of referring to campers in the third person and pretending to be an objective observer of all this, but it's obvious that you're a camper yourself who camps for the same reason they all do: "Hmmm, I just figured out that I don't have to spend a half hour grinding to help capture zones. Hey, I know! While the stupid suckers do the honorable thing and work together to complete the map like they should, I'll just camp out here and wait for the dinos to spawn and reap all the benefits for only three minutes of work. Because you see, I have no sense of fair play. I don't feel I should have to do any work to get all of this dilithium, and I think it's perfectly okay to leech off the hard work of other players."
Admit that this is what camping boils down for you, but please stop insulting everyone's intelligence with your carefully-worded "neutral" responses. This has nothing to do with the way the BZ works or people's alleged sense of entitlement or whatever justification you keep coming up with for camping. This has to do with you and your philosophy about game playing. You don't believe in fair play, period. If you don't believe in it, that's fine, but at least have the courage to stand by your convictions rather than pretending that you're just some independent, clear-thinking, neutral observer who just happens to be taking the side of campers. You ARE a camper, and you think there's nothing wrong with it.
Are you really that dense? Seriously did you even bother to read anything at all that I said. You use the logical fallacy and strawman of generalization in this instance. As I've said from the start, yes camping is a jerk move, but it's not against the rules. That's just a fact of the game. I'm not disagreeing a change is needed in the structure to discourage this. What I do disagree with is the "if it wasn't for me the zone never would've flipped and you owe it to me to wait until I get there before you start working the dino," type of attitude I've seen alot of folks taking up. What I do agree with is statements such as "it's a jerk move and there should be changes to structure to prevent camping."
For someone who's never met me in game or talked to me before this post you sure seem to think you know an awful lot about my gaming philosophy than you really do. My philosophy is I don't owe anyone in game anything, and they don't owe me anything. If the dino spawns and I don't make it to the spawn in time, then that's just my bad luck. Do I think folks should have an equal footing start to killing them such as the command center transporting thing, yes I do. I believe changes should be made not because it's owed to me or anyone else that helped cap the zones, but because I believe there needs to be motivation to use team work again and it would put everyone on equal footing in distance to the dinos starting out.
I was there when the dyson zone was on tribble and have been running it since it went live. The better majority of people's motivation to team and coordinate has all but gone out the window. At the start of the Dyson zone's introduction into the game, people had to coordinate to get stuff done and if they did so it assured maximum reward for the zone by allowing all 3 dinos to be tagged. Yet some people complained about tagging among a host of other things.
I believe in fair play and folks starting on equal footing with stuff like this, BUT I also believe in keeping it real. To suggest that someone camping is somehow breaking the rules in a place like the battlezones is simply not true and that's just a fact. It should be changed not because someone is owed something, because they're not. It should be changed to keep up with the times and to correct outdated design. The right thing done for the wrong reason is still wrong.
Honestly dude you really need to get over yourself and step out of your little fantasy bubble. It's attitudes like what you're displaying that is why alot of people don't want to run pugs and team with folks in this game anymore.
"Someone once told me that time was a predator that stalked us all our lives. I rather believe that time is a companion who goes with us on the journey and reminds us to cherish every moment, because it will never come again." - Jean Luc Picard in Star Trek Generations
DRJK, you are claiming that those who do the work have no rights to the reward. I think if we asked the Devs who designed the VBZ, they would say that was not their intent. The only players with an entitlement mentality, as described by you, are the campers. They did not work for the end result, yet they reap the rewards. If this was the Devs' intent, that is just plain poor game design. Why intentionally make a piece of content that is going to be frustrating enough that people just won't play it? Waste of time. No, the intent was for those participating in the BZ to have one big fight at the end with a good payout.
By the way, seeing as the game's ToS explicitly forbid the disruption of normal, intended game play (section 14 or 15 IIRC), camping isn't only a jerky thing to do, it is technically against the rules, if read from a completely legalistic direction.
Show me specifically where I said anywhere that those who do the work have no right to the reward. I want to see this for myself as I've said no such thing. What I have said is that the rewards are meant for the entire zone, not just a select few. If you're there when the zone flips, then it's intended for you to be able to tag the dinos and get rewards. As I said, if you want to argue for a change of structure because you feel that it doesn't put everyone on equal footing to have a chance at the dinos, and is unfair, is one thing. To come at it from the mindset of, I'm owed a chance at it because I did x, is another thing entirely.
As with any mmo in the course of its lifecycle there will be elements that become outdated and need to be updated or changed. This I will agree is one of those things that could use an update. As I've explained to others, there was motivation to coordinate and use teamwork when the zone was first introduced. That has been removed and other factors are now contributing to the problem.
Disrupting normal gameplay would be something along the lines of following a person around and killing their quest mobs to prevent them from being able to advance. By the logic you're using virtually anything could be considered "disrupting normal gameplay."
"Someone once told me that time was a predator that stalked us all our lives. I rather believe that time is a companion who goes with us on the journey and reminds us to cherish every moment, because it will never come again." - Jean Luc Picard in Star Trek Generations
Star Trek Online volunteer Community Moderator
0
Options
rattler2Member, Star Trek Online ModeratorPosts: 58,179Community Moderator
So far we have seen some interesting ideas on how to counter this trend. However I do think we need someone to look into this as well, as it is affecting a large population of players.
Well, not anymore, it isn't. The place is dead now because the changes to it made it SUCK.
You're assuming I also participated in Dino Tagging. I never did. I was content to stay and participate in the entire fight, run to the teleporter, hit up the next closest V-Rex, and stay to kill that. If by some chance there was still a V-Rex alive, then yea, I'd try and help kill that, but the City route is longer than the Outskirts or Park.
Give me an hour in the Voth Battlezone, I'll cap out my DL on turning in marks as well as the Implants from one round of killing at least 2 V-Rex, and then when the third goes down you generally get the full zone reward. But the issue isn't tagging for rewards. Its the fact that people are being denied the ability to take part in the V-Rex fight. Basically what's happening is the equivelent of going through a dungeon, only to discover that someone was already waiting at the boss room and and killed the boss before you could even fire a shot. That is the issue here that we are discussing. Not the fact that the rewards suck because of a change. Its because people are being denied that hard earned reward, which leads to fewer people coming to the zone, which in turn leads to your lack of players. Not Dino Tagging for MORE shiny.
Funny... my first post in this thread, the opening post, was calling for exactly that: what is wrong with this zone, and a fix to this zone. With a suggestion how to do it. In fact, the first page of this thread has multiple suggestions by various people and then you started the debate about entitlement simply because you didn't seem to like one specific suggestion. So in fact you admit that you derailed a thread just because you didn't like the wording of one specific suggestion.
If I see something that I believe to be a fallacy I'm going to call attention to it. Whether you agree with my assessment or not is purely on you. When someone says "I have a right to this because I did x and folks owe it to me to let me have it" when there are others in the zone besides them, I'm going to call shenanigans on that line of reasoning. If you want to say that my calling shenanigans on certain lines of thinking and points "derailing a post" then that is again on you.
And then when I start explaining why campers should wait, or better, why camping should be made impossible by adding forcefields and a timer, you launch this 'entitlement' thing against a perfectly reasonable solution as it would fix the problem of V'rexes being insta-killed, - another problem whose existence you keep denying just because you can -. While you keep saying that you think camping is a bad thing, you keep defending it. The quote 'you can't force people to go out and help cap' is enough proof of that.
I called it entitlement thinking because you came at it from the line of thinking of "I helped do this so I'm entitled to x" type of thinking. I also never denied that in some cases the dinos do go down faster than the Titanic did. What I did say was that it's going to happen from time to time and it's just bad luck when it does. I also gave ways folks can ensure they get there alot quicker and how most of the time it can be made a non issue. If you consider me stating the fact of "you can't force people to help" as me defending their actions, then you have more problems than you're accusing me of having. You can arm twist people all day long but no matter what you do you'll always have people who try to leech, just because that's in the nature of some people. You can severely reduce it, but it's something that can never be completely eliminated. You can call it whatever you will as to my points being made and you're free to disagree with them if you will. It however makes what I've said no less valid.
"Someone once told me that time was a predator that stalked us all our lives. I rather believe that time is a companion who goes with us on the journey and reminds us to cherish every moment, because it will never come again." - Jean Luc Picard in Star Trek Generations
Star Trek Online volunteer Community Moderator
0
Options
rattler2Member, Star Trek Online ModeratorPosts: 58,179Community Moderator
I called it entitlement thinking because you came at it from the line of thinking of "I helped do this so I'm entitled to x" type of thinking.
I think a little bit of entitlement is allowed if your intent is to see it through to the fight with the V-Rex. If you have to leave for some reason, then yea, you're out of luck. But if you go in fully intending to see it through to the end and get denied before you can even get there by spawn campers... something's wrong with that.
I called it entitlement thinking because you came at it from the line of thinking of "I helped do this so I'm entitled to x" type of thinking.
I think a little bit of entitlement is allowed if your intent is to see it through to the fight with the V-Rex. If you have to leave for some reason, then yea, you're out of luck. But if you go in fully intending to see it through to the end and get denied before you can even get there by spawn campers... something's wrong with that.
And this is what I'm talking about. You're the first one I've seen here to argue from the point of you don't believe it's fair which is a legitimate point to make. Like I've tried to tell these other folks, I agree that the current system could use an update as it can put folks at a disadvantage. I do not agree with most everyone's line of reasoning behind it though.
"Someone once told me that time was a predator that stalked us all our lives. I rather believe that time is a companion who goes with us on the journey and reminds us to cherish every moment, because it will never come again." - Jean Luc Picard in Star Trek Generations
You keep talking about these 'others in the zone'. In the instances I was in a few days ago when I created this thread, only I and one other player were capturing the last point. A dozen other players were camping. So there were no others helping to make the V-rex spawn. The problem is that serious, and that's what making the issue worse: literally no one wants to be the guy who's capturing the last point anymore.
It's not bad luck... it's a flawed design (or maybe not a flawed design, just a design that hasn't kept up with other developments in the game). That's why it needs to be fixed. I'm glad we can at least agree on that.
0
Options
rattler2Member, Star Trek Online ModeratorPosts: 58,179Community Moderator
I think its how you approached the situation that is causing some problems.
The way you were saying it may have come across as combative or something wasn't translating.
Obviously, camping is allowed. That doesn't mean it's good. It doesn't mean the players who did all the work capping the nodes don't deserve a reward. A reward the campers often steal. They are allowed to do so under the current rules. That just means the rules are bad.
The battlezone has a very badly designed reward structure. It's a Prisoner's Dilemma, cooperation is needed to advance the zone but the reward structure favors betraying your fellow players by camping the bosses instead. That needs to be changed.
If it wasn't for the "capture two nodes in city/park/outskirts" daily mission that has a decent reward in itself, almost nobody would be capturing nodes at all, and the entire battlezone would be dead.
Technically speaking it is an exploit as campers are exploiting the hard work done by players capturing points and taking advantage of the higher reward structure of the map by only participating in this part of the mission. So it is exploiting from a certain perspective.
I honestly hope you tried to quote me and just screwed up the coding for the quote. Otherwise that would be a pretty desperate attempt to make it look like I said something else.
With that in mind as I've said elsewhere, camping is not against the rules. There is nothing about a battlezone that specifically says you're not allowed to camp. Yes we can say it's a jerk move to intentionally camp. It's also not an exploit nor is it theft. Arguments such as that are so far beyond ridiculous that even Q himself wouldn't be able to wrap his mind around it.
As I've said to others, no one is owed anything in the battlezones. Once the dinos spawn if people can make it to the dino in time then they get rewards, which at the moment also includes the campers. Now we can argue for change to the system to discourage camping and the structure of those changes are something we can all argue. However lets keep it realistic. Battlezones are open ended places where people come and go all the time. It's certainly not an exploit and it's certainly not theft either as no one owns anything in that zone. I don't like leeches anymore than the next guy but I also believe in sticking with reality which is what I'm not seeing by alot of folks here.
Coding got screwed up. couldn't get it to reply/quote properly. Fixed it for you
Show you specifically where you said that those who do the work have no right to the reward? Ok, DKJK, on this very page, you have said "Entitlement mentality is when someone thinks they have a right to something, or a claim on something. In the instance I've used the term, people feel they have a claim to something when they don't."
If you really feel that what is happening is wrong, and that the zone needs an update, why do you continue to argue the point, trying to split hairs, in favor of the "nothing's wrong" side?
Also, if following someone around and killing their mobs is a disruption of play, how is killing a zone boss that only triggers after the area is cleared before those who clear the zone can get there any different? Both is keeping a player from getting rewards they are working towards, neither is working the content in a way intended by the Devs.
"Logic is a little tweeting bird chirping in a meadow. Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers which smell BAD." - Spock
Comments
Technically speaking it is an exploit as campers are exploiting the hard work done by players capturing points and taking advantage of the higher reward structure of the map by only participating in this part of the mission. So it is exploiting from a certain perspective.
Upping dino hp isn't a solution either. It is supposed to be a level 50 zone. My suggestion is let the dino's spawn each after another so everybody can make a full score. Also give rewards for taking points and a bonus on top of it when you kill the dino. The more you work, the bigger the reward is. I do not understand why it is so difficult it is to make it work in the game. Or do they want a game that is also satisfying for freeriders, cheaters and exploiters? Is that their business model? The anti social players must also have a place even at the expence of the social player? A customer is a customer, money is money?
Tagging was, if you understood the system, a very social event. The whole instance needed to coordinate to make sure the rotation allows for each spawn to effectively be tagged and then fought to avoid defeat. I was a very extensive BZ player and I rarely witnessed a fail because after some time more or less everyone got the concept and if not they'd ask about it and you could point them to it.
The way the Dyson BZ is designed is not optimal, I grant you that. The reinforcement mark thingies being dropped like a burst piñata is a really stupid move as that can literally lead to people grabbing rewards for not doing something. Complaining about the tagging though is misdirected anger as the whole tagging deal was a lot more social and tactical than everyone standing around and shooting the big mob.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
It maybe a level 50 zone but 2 years ago when it was released you didn't have Mk XIV Epic ground gear or any of the various traits , set abilities, or kit modules higher that XII unlike now which don't seem to scale down to the old Mk XII VR which would have been the best you could do 2 years ago.
Easiest to implement solution would be a mass beam of players from their location to the command center with a say 30sec window before players can exit to combat the dinos to account for server lag, load screens, etc.. presuming they care at all since the zone hasnt really changed majorly since release [irrc] other than tagging dinos was changed to camping dinos it seems.
I honestly hope you tried to quote me and just screwed up the coding for the quote. Otherwise that would be a pretty desperate attempt to make it look like I said something else.
With that in mind as I've said elsewhere, camping is not against the rules. There is nothing about a battlezone that specifically says you're not allowed to camp. Yes we can say it's a jerk move to intentionally camp. It's also not an exploit nor is it theft. Arguments such as that are so far beyond ridiculous that even Q himself wouldn't be able to wrap his mind around it.
As I've said to others, no one is owed anything in the battlezones. Once the dinos spawn if people can make it to the dino in time then they get rewards, which at the moment also includes the campers. Now we can argue for change to the system to discourage camping and the structure of those changes are something we can all argue. However lets keep it realistic. Battlezones are open ended places where people come and go all the time. It's certainly not an exploit and it's certainly not theft either as no one owns anything in that zone. I don't like leeches anymore than the next guy but I also believe in sticking with reality which is what I'm not seeing by alot of folks here.
Star Trek Online volunteer Community Moderator
Throwing the word around like it is bad doesn't really show a true appreciation of what the word means. It's like the word DISCRIMINATION. Oooh... A bad thing, right? No, we discriminate all the time. If I'm going hiking, I'm going to react differently to meeting another hiker on the trail than if it were a bear. On that same hike, which would be the more appropriate subject for a picture I might take? The view from the mountain summit, or the dead squirrel I found along the trail? Discrimination, we use it all the time. Same with entitlement.
I call it what it is, entitlement, aka the feeling you're owed something when you're not. The current structure allows for everyone in the zone to get the reward, not just the guy that soloed half the place himself. Yes at the moment that includes campers as much as none of us may like it. You have just as much chance as anyone else to get the dino when it spawns. You're not a special snowflake that the rest of the zone should have to wait on because, oh i spawned the dino now you owe it to me to let me shoot it. There are more people in the zone than just you. At this point if all you can do is argue semantics then you must be out of steam already.
It's the same in every battlezone, if you can get there quick enough, then you can tag the boss and get rewards. As I've said to others, learn the routes and use the tools available to you and 99% of the time it will be a non-issue. You're going to get into one of those zones from time to time where the dinos drop faster than a sack of bricks in a lake, it comes with the territory of the dyson zone. If you can't deal with that then you don't need to run the zone.
Star Trek Online volunteer Community Moderator
Meaning the current structure is flawed, which is one of the reasons why this thread was created. You're defending a situation that you admit you don't agree with. That's a bit confusing tbh.
[/quote]
And this is simply not true. Indeed, the fact that it's not true (due to campers) is the whole reason why people are annoyed with how things are organised in this zone. And rightfully so, as you have admitted yourself.
Edit: had to correct a quote...
inˈtīdlmənt,enˈtīdlmənt/
noun
the fact of having a right to something.
"full entitlement to fees and maintenance should be offered"
synonyms: right, prerogative, claim
Entitlement doesn't have anything to do with "feeling you're owed something when you're not" as you put it.
Someone else compared the spawn campers to someone doing nothing in a PvE queue until the end and getting the same reward as you.
They were wrong.
It is like someone doing nothing in a PvE queue until the end, resulting in those who fought the fight getting an AFK penalty.
Indeed. Funny how everyone keeps trying to kill all debates and topics of discussion by claiming that another poster is feeling 'entitled'. As if there cannot be good reasons to feel entitled in certain instances.
It's a bit similar with the word 'nerf' really. Just by saying that someone's proposing a nerf to something, they think they've made a point. Which simply isn't true. Throwing around words that have a bad connotation in an effort to kill a discussion seems to be an effective strategy, unfortunetaly.
I'm not defending camping by any means. what I am saying is that it's not breaking the rules as some people are suggesting. there is a big difference between the 2. We can argue structure of the zone all day long and that's cool. However there are a great deal of erroneous arguments going on and that is what I'm calling shenanigans on.
In no way are the campers denying you anything. That is one of the erroneous arguments being made here. Like I said learn the routes and use the tools available and you can make it to the dino. It's also a fallacy to suggest that just the campers are the problem. If enough folks are in say the City and they make it to the dino, they can nuke it stupid fast. I'm not opposed to changes to reduce or even eliminate camping. I do find it ridiculous however for people to behave as though they're owed something when they're not.
Apparently you were incapable of understanding what entitlement mentality is. Entitlement mentality is when someone thinks they have a right to something, or a claim on something. In the instance I've used the term, people feel they have a claim to something when they don't.
When someone behaves as though they have a right to something or a claim to something and folks should be required to wait on them, if you don't call it entitlement mentality then what do you suggest we call it? If the shoe fits then that's what I'm going to call it. As I said above, I'm not opposed to discussion. What I am opposed to is people thinking they're owed something when they're not. There are more people in the zones aside from them.
Star Trek Online volunteer Community Moderator
The campers are denying those who work for their reward a lot. Like I said, the dino was down in mere seconds, there was no way to reach it in time, even with frosted boots, even by taking the shortest route from the point I was capturing to the silo. How is that 'not denying' me (and others) anything if they make it impossible to get there in time? It's not an erroneous argument, if you think it is, then you're basically saying that I'm lying. Which I'm not, and the same goes, most likely, for the others who have confirmed the existence of this problem.
And we can argue all day whether we have the right to get the reward, but let's assume for the moment that actually playing the game should be rewarded (as is the case in most other parts of the game, especially the queues - the AFK penalty was mentioned for a reason) and that not playing the game and just standing near a certain spot and then shoot at an enemy while they've done literally nothing to make it spawn should not grant rewards. Sounds reasonable, right? Then it seems clear to me that the current structure isn't working since it gives those who are willing to actually play the game a lower reward, thus they are at a disadvantage, resulting in conflicts and increasingly unwillingness to actually play that zone to make the dino spawn (edit: which is probably another reason why camping has become a much more serious issue - the fact that 'tagging' is no longer possible cannot entirely explain this trend).
There are indeed more people in that zone, but if the majority is not making themselves useful in any way, why should they be given a reward? One might as well argue that anyone who's opposed to changing the way things work, that they in fact are suffering from this 'entitlement mentality' since they basically want to keep earning rewards for not helping out.
All this talk talk talk is you trying to present in neutral language your personal philosophy about camping, to give the illusion that you're approaching it from a position of objectivity. It's like when people who shamelessly pirate video games, software and movies talk in very neutral terms about how "the greed of the industry has made it necessary for people to pirate their content" when you get down to it, their reasons for pirating comes down to, "Why buy something when I can just torrent it for free?"
That's all you're doing. You're doing a good job of referring to campers in the third person and pretending to be an objective observer of all this, but it's obvious that you're a camper yourself who camps for the same reason they all do: "Hmmm, I just figured out that I don't have to spend a half hour grinding to help capture zones. Hey, I know! While the stupid suckers do the honorable thing and work together to complete the map like they should, I'll just camp out here and wait for the dinos to spawn and reap all the benefits for only three minutes of work. Because you see, I have no sense of fair play. I don't feel I should have to do any work to get all of this dilithium, and I think it's perfectly okay to leech off the hard work of other players."
Admit that this is what camping boils down for you, but please stop insulting everyone's intelligence with your carefully-worded "neutral" responses. This has nothing to do with the way the BZ works or people's alleged sense of entitlement or whatever justification you keep coming up with for camping. This has to do with you and your philosophy about game playing. You don't believe in fair play, period. If you don't believe in it, that's fine, but at least have the courage to stand by your convictions rather than pretending that you're just some independent, clear-thinking, neutral observer who just happens to be taking the side of campers. You ARE a camper, and you think there's nothing wrong with it.
That one never gets old.
By the way, seeing as the game's ToS explicitly forbid the disruption of normal, intended game play (section 14 or 15 IIRC), camping isn't only a jerky thing to do, it is technically against the rules, if read from a completely legalistic direction.
They aren't denying you a thing save in your mind. As I've already explained several times, the dinos are intended to be for anyone in the zone to shoot at. In this current form yes this includes the campers. Does that make it right, no it doesn't. I understand what you're saying that you couldn't get there in time. What I'm telling you is that sometimes that will happen in the Dyson zone and you're overreacting. Yes it sucks, yes it's a jerk move by the folks who camp, yes the zone can use a facelift and a restructuring while they're at it. Bottom line is it's going to happen from time to time, be it the Dyson zone or some other place in the game such as a red alert, that stuff gets nuked before you can get there. That's just a fact of the game and if you can't stand that you don't need to be in the zone.
The AFK penalty is irrelevant in the case of a battlezone. People come and go all the time in the zone and very rarely will you have 100% of the same team you started with when the zone flips. Suppose a person caps all but the last zone by himself and is forced to drop from the zone due to a concern outside the game. Should the person(s) who replace him not be allowed to get the dinos? Or another example, suppose someone caps a couple of zones or even one, and is forced to afk due to something beyond their control. Suppose as well they return just as the dinos spawn, should they be discounted from getting the rewards? Actually disallowing the tagging like what we had before had far more consequences than you think it did. Before hand as others have pointed out, folks would rotate between the 3 dinos getting in their tags and settle at the last dino in their rotation. When this was going on it gave everyone a chance to tag the dinos and it gave people a reason to coordinate. Why would they settle for just one or 2 when with a little coordination you could guarantee full rewards for the entire zone? No the removal of tagging isn't the only factor but it is one of the major ones. Since level 60 wasn't a thing when the Dyson zone was introduced, you now have level 60s coming into a zone meant for 50s that are packing gear that's 10 levels above what the zone was originally intended for. In other words the removal of tagging along with a few other factors created an every man for himself type of thinking down there. When you remove reasons for folks in the zone to coordinate and use teamwork, things tend to go bonkers like we're seeing today.
Like I said camping is a jerk move, no one is debating that. We can debate how a structure change should work and if one is needed all day long and that's perfectly cool. There is a big difference in arguing from a place of feeling you're owed something and arguing for the betterment of the zone. When you argue along the lines of "I helped spawn the dinos therefore I have a right to shoot them, and you owe it me to let me get there," you argue from feeling owed something, which you're not. When you argue from the stance of "I don't think it's fair under the current structure and I think it should be changed to give everyone an equal starting chance at the dino," then that's cool. If you want to get teamwork going, then give people a reason to want to help out. Give people a reason to want to team and so on. As it sits right now, those reasons and motivations don't exist anymore.
Star Trek Online volunteer Community Moderator
Yes, I caught that, too. I think he said something along the lines of, "It's okay to do it because there are no rules against it." This is like when a supermarket hands out free samples and someone grabs enough to feed a family of four based on the logic of, "Well, it's okay if I take 15 samples because the store didn't say there were any limits to how many I could take. And besides, everyone else is free to grab 15-20 samples just like me, so what is everyone complaining about?"
Funny... my first post in this thread, the opening post, was calling for exactly that: what is wrong with this zone, and a fix to this zone. With a suggestion how to do it. In fact, the first page of this thread has multiple suggestions by various people and then you started the debate about entitlement simply because you didn't seem to like one specific suggestion. So in fact you admit that you derailed a thread just because you didn't like the wording of one specific suggestion.
From one of your first replies:
and
And then when I start explaining why campers should wait, or better, why camping should be made impossible by adding forcefields and a timer, you launch this 'entitlement' thing against a perfectly reasonable solution as it would fix the problem of V'rexes being insta-killed, - another problem whose existence you keep denying just because you can -. While you keep saying that you think camping is a bad thing, you keep defending it. The quote 'you can't force people to go out and help cap' is enough proof of that.
(Changed for grammar reasons)
Are you really that dense? Seriously did you even bother to read anything at all that I said. You use the logical fallacy and strawman of generalization in this instance. As I've said from the start, yes camping is a jerk move, but it's not against the rules. That's just a fact of the game. I'm not disagreeing a change is needed in the structure to discourage this. What I do disagree with is the "if it wasn't for me the zone never would've flipped and you owe it to me to wait until I get there before you start working the dino," type of attitude I've seen alot of folks taking up. What I do agree with is statements such as "it's a jerk move and there should be changes to structure to prevent camping."
For someone who's never met me in game or talked to me before this post you sure seem to think you know an awful lot about my gaming philosophy than you really do. My philosophy is I don't owe anyone in game anything, and they don't owe me anything. If the dino spawns and I don't make it to the spawn in time, then that's just my bad luck. Do I think folks should have an equal footing start to killing them such as the command center transporting thing, yes I do. I believe changes should be made not because it's owed to me or anyone else that helped cap the zones, but because I believe there needs to be motivation to use team work again and it would put everyone on equal footing in distance to the dinos starting out.
I was there when the dyson zone was on tribble and have been running it since it went live. The better majority of people's motivation to team and coordinate has all but gone out the window. At the start of the Dyson zone's introduction into the game, people had to coordinate to get stuff done and if they did so it assured maximum reward for the zone by allowing all 3 dinos to be tagged. Yet some people complained about tagging among a host of other things.
I believe in fair play and folks starting on equal footing with stuff like this, BUT I also believe in keeping it real. To suggest that someone camping is somehow breaking the rules in a place like the battlezones is simply not true and that's just a fact. It should be changed not because someone is owed something, because they're not. It should be changed to keep up with the times and to correct outdated design. The right thing done for the wrong reason is still wrong.
Honestly dude you really need to get over yourself and step out of your little fantasy bubble. It's attitudes like what you're displaying that is why alot of people don't want to run pugs and team with folks in this game anymore.
Star Trek Online volunteer Community Moderator
Show me specifically where I said anywhere that those who do the work have no right to the reward. I want to see this for myself as I've said no such thing. What I have said is that the rewards are meant for the entire zone, not just a select few. If you're there when the zone flips, then it's intended for you to be able to tag the dinos and get rewards. As I said, if you want to argue for a change of structure because you feel that it doesn't put everyone on equal footing to have a chance at the dinos, and is unfair, is one thing. To come at it from the mindset of, I'm owed a chance at it because I did x, is another thing entirely.
As with any mmo in the course of its lifecycle there will be elements that become outdated and need to be updated or changed. This I will agree is one of those things that could use an update. As I've explained to others, there was motivation to coordinate and use teamwork when the zone was first introduced. That has been removed and other factors are now contributing to the problem.
Disrupting normal gameplay would be something along the lines of following a person around and killing their quest mobs to prevent them from being able to advance. By the logic you're using virtually anything could be considered "disrupting normal gameplay."
Star Trek Online volunteer Community Moderator
You're assuming I also participated in Dino Tagging. I never did. I was content to stay and participate in the entire fight, run to the teleporter, hit up the next closest V-Rex, and stay to kill that. If by some chance there was still a V-Rex alive, then yea, I'd try and help kill that, but the City route is longer than the Outskirts or Park.
Give me an hour in the Voth Battlezone, I'll cap out my DL on turning in marks as well as the Implants from one round of killing at least 2 V-Rex, and then when the third goes down you generally get the full zone reward. But the issue isn't tagging for rewards. Its the fact that people are being denied the ability to take part in the V-Rex fight. Basically what's happening is the equivelent of going through a dungeon, only to discover that someone was already waiting at the boss room and and killed the boss before you could even fire a shot. That is the issue here that we are discussing. Not the fact that the rewards suck because of a change. Its because people are being denied that hard earned reward, which leads to fewer people coming to the zone, which in turn leads to your lack of players. Not Dino Tagging for MORE shiny.
If I see something that I believe to be a fallacy I'm going to call attention to it. Whether you agree with my assessment or not is purely on you. When someone says "I have a right to this because I did x and folks owe it to me to let me have it" when there are others in the zone besides them, I'm going to call shenanigans on that line of reasoning. If you want to say that my calling shenanigans on certain lines of thinking and points "derailing a post" then that is again on you.
I called it entitlement thinking because you came at it from the line of thinking of "I helped do this so I'm entitled to x" type of thinking. I also never denied that in some cases the dinos do go down faster than the Titanic did. What I did say was that it's going to happen from time to time and it's just bad luck when it does. I also gave ways folks can ensure they get there alot quicker and how most of the time it can be made a non issue. If you consider me stating the fact of "you can't force people to help" as me defending their actions, then you have more problems than you're accusing me of having. You can arm twist people all day long but no matter what you do you'll always have people who try to leech, just because that's in the nature of some people. You can severely reduce it, but it's something that can never be completely eliminated. You can call it whatever you will as to my points being made and you're free to disagree with them if you will. It however makes what I've said no less valid.
Star Trek Online volunteer Community Moderator
I think a little bit of entitlement is allowed if your intent is to see it through to the fight with the V-Rex. If you have to leave for some reason, then yea, you're out of luck. But if you go in fully intending to see it through to the end and get denied before you can even get there by spawn campers... something's wrong with that.
And this is what I'm talking about. You're the first one I've seen here to argue from the point of you don't believe it's fair which is a legitimate point to make. Like I've tried to tell these other folks, I agree that the current system could use an update as it can put folks at a disadvantage. I do not agree with most everyone's line of reasoning behind it though.
Star Trek Online volunteer Community Moderator
It's not bad luck... it's a flawed design (or maybe not a flawed design, just a design that hasn't kept up with other developments in the game). That's why it needs to be fixed. I'm glad we can at least agree on that.
The way you were saying it may have come across as combative or something wasn't translating.
The battlezone has a very badly designed reward structure. It's a Prisoner's Dilemma, cooperation is needed to advance the zone but the reward structure favors betraying your fellow players by camping the bosses instead. That needs to be changed.
If it wasn't for the "capture two nodes in city/park/outskirts" daily mission that has a decent reward in itself, almost nobody would be capturing nodes at all, and the entire battlezone would be dead.
Coding got screwed up. couldn't get it to reply/quote properly. Fixed it for you
If you really feel that what is happening is wrong, and that the zone needs an update, why do you continue to argue the point, trying to split hairs, in favor of the "nothing's wrong" side?
Also, if following someone around and killing their mobs is a disruption of play, how is killing a zone boss that only triggers after the area is cleared before those who clear the zone can get there any different? Both is keeping a player from getting rewards they are working towards, neither is working the content in a way intended by the Devs.