@lil-fokker Sorry. Not in any way valid. This is not a trailer of cargo that you are being advised to drop somewhere different to your original drop location by your boss and him saying he won't pay.
This is closer to you as an independent armoured truck operator losing all of your clients goods to some thieves and then expecting to still get paid. Not gonna happen Bucko.
Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.
Like, I'm gonna pay you $1.00 to deliver a chest to me. You can find one by digging or steal one, doesn't matter to me. Stealing is harder. Most people choose to dig. Now I'm gonna change digging to pay $1.50 and guarantee you $0.50 whether you deliver the chest or not. Stealing continues to only pay $1.00. Somehow in your mind you expect more people to choose stealing than did before? To risk their $1.00 for the chance at another $1.00 because they've already been paid $0.50?
Stealing earns you $2.50. Your $1.50 from your voyage and $1.00 from the other player (pure PvP players is not a valid argument for those interested in loot they would still be doing PvE voyages). I think adding that extra $1.00 aka 66% of another voyage is worth it knowing that you still have that $0.50 even if you lose as opposed to risking everything. It’s a better risk vs reward if defender wanted to fight.
Assuming both players carrying equal treasure:
New system: 33% remaining on loss compared to +66% gain on win.
Old system: is 0% gain on loss to +100% gain on win.
First, if your argument is it discourages PvP Bc they lose 33% (which is false but since you like comparative gains and not absolutes) let’s look at how PvP is usually conducted. It’s by attacking a vulnerable opponent and usually opportunistic (assuming it’s for loot and not just for the lolz). It should cost very little time from the attacker if done properly for efficient loot gain. So that 66% gain is still very much worth the short time it should take for purposeful PvP.
If people are going on long chases then they don’t care about the loot Bc unless they saw them steaming away from a fort they could not know how much of a haul they were carrying therefore they don’t even know if they have decent loot, yet they are wasting a huge amount of time with quite possibly 0 reward.
Moving on, the ones in the current system doing the attack typically attack when they have nothing to lose making the reward 0% on lose or 0% gain for the defender so no real reason to fight. Same scenario in new system they keep 33% on loss even if it turns out being for 0% gain. The player attacking you may still have nothing. I know not everyone will fight but I think it would encourage more people to defend instead of run knowing that they at least earned something.
I also think this system will increase the time before ppl turn in and more ppl will wait till voyage completion, thus increasing players chance of finding treasure when they attack, thus incentivizing PvP more for the pvpve players.
It won’t change on a grand scale but it will shift the balance more to where I (hopefully) think the devs want it: the interaction to be where people defend loot instead of automatically run.
I know you will read this disagree and rip it apart so have fun :) you too savage and entspeak :)
@daveyjay1984 said in Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.:
@lil-fokker Sorry. Not in any way valid. This is not a trailer of cargo that you are being advised to drop somewhere different to your original drop location by your boss and him saying he won't pay.
This is closer to you as an independent armoured truck operator losing all of your clients goods to some thieves and then expecting to still get paid. Not gonna happen Bucko.Why tho? Why is the first system invalid but the one you gave correct other than you saying so? Is it not the devs decision? Im sure you can come up with a bunch of explanations but this is a rhetorical question. Most of these arguments stem from assuming the devs position or assuming it cannot be changed or influenced by how the players respond or the direction their game progresses.
@i-am-lost-77 said in Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.:
Like, I'm gonna pay you $1.00 to deliver a chest to me. You can find one by digging or steal one, doesn't matter to me. Stealing is harder. Most people choose to dig. Now I'm gonna change digging to pay $1.50 and guarantee you $0.50 whether you deliver the chest or not. Stealing continues to only pay $1.00. Somehow in your mind you expect more people to choose stealing than did before? To risk their $1.00 for the chance at another $1.00 because they've already been paid $0.50?
Stealing earns you $2.50.
I advise you as well to stay away from casinos.
@lil-fokker Exactly, and the thing is I understand the loot still needs to be very valuable, as that is the core principle of the game, valuable cargo which can be stolen at any time by anyone... but there is no reason for the people who obtained the treasure to get nothing.
@i-am-lost-77 And that is the crux of this which the people who disagree fail to grasp. If the devs release information saying 'no actually we wanted this, this is perfect and what we hoped to achieve' then that is fine, I will still play the game, I will accept that it won't happen and this thread won't exist anymore. Somehow I don't think this will happen. We KNOW what the game is now and we KNOW what the devs set out to achieve, this thread is all about player experience and feedback and then the devs can decide what they want to do about it - shift the game towards a slightly different position (which in our minds is healthier for the players) or keep it as it is, which is fine if that's what they want. But a lot of the disagreeing arguments basically boil down to - 'yea this is what the game IS' 'yea this is what the devs WANT'... which I don't think are valid arguments..
@daveyjay1984 The analogy by @Lil-fokker was still more relevant. In your analogy the theives would not be rewarded for taking the clients goods where it needs to go, they'd be arrested... in Lil-fokkers both the drivers receive something for their time and contribution for the delivery. Now this game is clearly a thief game, so I'm not suggesting that the rewards need to be in proportion like the lorry driver analogy - the loot still needs to remain the most valuable asset players have, but this is completely feasible.
More to the point, I'd say we are far closer to the lorry drivers than an armour truck driver because by the very nature of how loot works, the NPCs are not interested who turns it in, I can assure you that it is VERY important who turns in clientele goods on an armoured truck! Strictly only the people employed (i.e. who the contract has been given to). In the lorry analogy if a driver leaves work and hands the cargo to someone else, then they will both be paid for the time they put in.
Obviously neither analogy is perfect as in the game it wouldn't be 'passing on the cargo', but someone actively stealing the cargo :P But the lorry one explains the principle of this thread fairly well.
I replied to your last concern by the way.
@entspeak To be honest, you probably would be paid. The company still has to pay you for the time you worked up until you could no longer perform your job - when the trailer was stolen. If the trailer was stolen because you left the keys in then clearly that's your fault, but otherwise it's unlikely to be your fault, if someone jump starts the engine or grabs a crow bar while you're on a 10 minute break and you're in the shop buying some food or whatever, opens the back and takes the stuff out.... you can't be blamed for that. You can't be at the vehicle 24/7, shop, toilet etc.. long-haul journeys people often sleep in their trucks, if someone is able to open the back quietly then again, not really your fault, you gotta sleep.
@angrycoconut16 Typically, there is insurance against these types of things, but if you don’t have it, you are on the hook for the loss. If you have it, but it doesn’t cover the full value of what was stolen, you’re on the hook for the remainder. No insurance in SoT, nor do I think you got paid in the Golden Age of Pirates if you didn’t deliver.
In terms of fault, if you don’t deliver in SoT, the fault is yours because “a ship isn't just going to come out of nowhere unless you've let it come out of nowhere.” So any analogy would have to take into consideration the fault of the driver. There is no sleep mechanic, there is no valid reason to not be paying attention - “boring” doesn’t cut it.
You also could’ve done a partial delivery. I know, “boring”, but there’s your insurance. It’d be like having your boss tell you that you have the option to drop off some of the items on the truck along the way, but you don’t do that, and the everything gets stolen because you weren’t paying attention. They’re going to wonder why you didn’t do the partial deliveries... “boring” would not be a valid response.
@lotrmith Buddy, you don't need my validation! Make good points and I am happy to agree with them. I am not here to argue, told all of you that a long time ago. I have an idea, that is what I am sticking too! And next time give a full quote for clarity.
The only reason I am agreeing with what was said is because it highlights the fact that players holding loot have no incentive to stay and fight (unless cornered of course). Where as a ship or crew with no loot has every incentive. lowering that incentive while raising the other would bring balance to the system. My thoughts on it, it is untested, but human nature dictates...if you stand to lose it all in a gamble, most folks won't lay down the bet. No many are comfortable in an all or nothing scenario. Lower the incentive to attack on sight, while raising the incentive to defend...and boom, we have some balance. And I am out....
Maybe chests/skulls could go up in value the longer they are in game, to encourage people not to cash them in straight away. Once they become active, dug up, killed, held by a pirate if found etc they start at 50gold for example and then increase in value the longer they are in game upto a fixed max. That way if you want a quick reward you can but if you want to take a risk and get more gold wait longer to cash it in. That way PvP players have a chance to steal things worth having. You'd still need a small reward for completing a map or VC though to have value to the pve players.
@wafflingsumo said in Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.:
Maybe chests/skulls could go up in value the longer they are in game, to encourage people not to cash them in straight away. Once they become active, dug up, killed, held by a pirate if found etc they start at 50gold for example and then increase in value the longer they are in game upto a fixed max. That way if you want a quick reward you can but if you want to take a risk and get more gold wait longer to cash it in. That way PvP players have a chance to steal things worth having. You'd still need a small reward for completing a map or VC though to have value to the pve players.
Those arguing against this idea keep saying that PvE players can just outpost hop to keep the value of their goods so Rep on VC isn't necessary. I can tell you I do outpost hop and it gets really old. 3 islands close together that I'm to visit and an outpost a ways off but in order to insure I get the credit I have to do one island, outpost, another island, outpost.
All I would like is to have something for my work put in. I won't just hand over my hard work to the person attacking me and that often means hitting the red sea since I'm not a good PvPer. It's not the value of the chest, it's the value on my hard work and time. If I'm not going to get the benefit of it, why should I give it to you?
I have also said that if I received even a small amount of reputation (not gold) for the work that isn't tied to the loot, I would be more willing to turn and fight! I would also be much more willing to hit all three islands before hitting an outpost. My work would still be recognized. If I was attacked, I'd have more loot than the 2 or 3 chest max I am willing to carry now.
I also do not believe this is a PvP game with PvE elements. There is way too much E for that to be true! Besides, what is a pirate if he has no loot to steal? The PvE is important to the game. I happen to like the thrill of needing to be aware of the PvP and in no way have I ever wanted a PvE only game!
What those of us advocating for some change are aware of is that we will lose a lot of PvE players if something doesn't change. This idea, another idea, it doesn't matter. Again, without PvE there is no loot. We just want to keep the game fun for everyone so there are plenty of options.
I would consider REP and not gold for finishing voyages more like, "You're a reliable person who actually completes the mission and thus your reputation with us is better."
If you want the truck driver, it's like, being asked to make four stops to pick up goods, but three of them will pay you 1000 and one pays 100, so you're like, I'm only going to deliver the three that are worth it and not bother with it.
Why would you get hired again? That other one was still important. Taking the time to complete the ENTIRE JOB should earn you something with the company.
That's the analogy that makes sense.
@mintprizma I do get what you are saying. I look at it as though these merchants know that they are sending us out into a very dangerous world where we not only fight to gather the goods but then have to fight to get them back. They understand that there is a high risk and therefor they value your effort and know that you do manage to bring the goods most of the time. The appreciate that you are willing to go out again and again for them.
Again, this is to try and alleviate the frustration that players feel of doing all that work for nothing. It's not taking away from the PvP aspect and since most players do some PvE they would also benefit!
I know many have said it does take away from PvP but I honestly don't see it. I would be more willing to fight you and lose if I had something for my work. I would be easy money! The PvP players still get what they would have before. They would get more because I'd be willing to not only carry more but fight.
@touchdown1504 said in Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.:
Lower the incentive to attack on sight, while raising the incentive to defend...and boom, we have some balance.
Except that it doesn't balance (not the least of which because you have very poor understandings of the types of players who are involved in fights).
In short, you overestimate the risk assessment priorities of those who you are attempting to target with this change. They are not going to be more likely, as you claim, to either initiate a fight or stand their ground instead of run because of any combination of the following: The bulk of the rep is still attached to their loot. They simply don't like losing their loot to other players. This change, and really no change, actually improves their odds of not losing their loot.
@lotrmith said in Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.:
@touchdown1504 said in Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.:
Lower the incentive to attack on sight, while raising the incentive to defend...and boom, we have some balance.
Except that it doesn't balance (not the least of which because you have very poor understandings of the types of players who are involved in fights).
In short, you overestimate the risk assessment priorities of those who you are attempting to target with this change. They are not going to be more likely, as you claim, to either initiate a fight or stand their ground instead of run because of any combination of the following: The bulk of the rep is still attached to their loot. They simply don't like losing their loot to other players. This change, and really no change, actually improves their odds of not losing their loot.
It does, however, let aggressive players off their leash, the ones already willing to lose loot, so there is a potential uptick in hostile play, just not from the PvE focused people. They complain about hostile players having nothing to lose and this will... reduce the little they do have to lose.
@lil-fokker said in Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.:
I wonder if this analogy will help out.......probably not.
You're a long haul truck driver delivering a trailer of goods from San Francisco to Maine.
You drive for 8 days getting to New Hampshire and your boss calls and says to leave the trailer at a local rest stop near mile marker 216 where another trucker will take the trailer the rest of the way.
You say, "Yessir boss...what about my pay?"
Your boss says, "Oh you ain't getting paid....cuz you didn't deliver the trailer."
Wouldn't you be a little peeved?That's all we're pointing out here. We want some rep for the work that we've done. We're not saying that the trucker who took the trailer the rest of the way doesn't get their share or even the accolades of actually making the delivery.....just don't forget about the work that I've done.
Later
We understand the point of the suggestion, we disagree with its actual value based on how the rest of the game is designed.
For instance imagine a world where a small town was set up and the trucker only had to make small trips of 10 mins, enter a small dance studio and dance for 30 secs, and receive an item he'd have to now deliver. He would be rewarded with points on completion but other trucks would potentially try to stop him.
Based on my description, most people would presume that the trucker was in a game show, not at work. So calling what you're doing "work" and wanting to be rewarded for it... at best is a joke.
Also nonsensical, the trucker wouldn't be paid for delivering where he was asked to deliver it? If he lost the trailer along the way he probably wouldn't get paid for it. It's not even a good analogy.
@lotrmith No...That is not at all my point. Never has been, never will be. I can give two s***s about losing gold. I do care about losing Reputation AKA Experience Points. Quit trying to misrepresent people's positions. Never once have I said I am bothered by loot loss...Reputation loss yes. That is the feedback I will continue to provide. At this point though this thread is dead, sure it will be shut soon, so I will provide fresh and new in the next one.
Finally how do you know what people will or won't do? Lets just be clear here...you don't know! You can't know because it hasn't been done. Where do you get bulk of rep? You are confusing my ideas with someone else's. Mine does NOT leave the bulk of rep on loot. Mine moves the timing of rep rewards. Scroll back and read if you need a refresh. Next time you reply make sure you check your notes and know who you are referencing. The reason I rarely even check this thread anymore is because you guys are all over the place. There are different ideas in here...and one tiny little group of people trying to light those ideas on fire. Pathetic.
@angrycoconut16
Right. I know that there's a pop-up that hits everyone's screen when your shovel first hits the proper spot.
Do we know what that tallies if anything?
Then, taking on enemy ships while carrying that cargo....if that carried some pro/con valuation as well. Like sinking a ship while carrying cargo, like killing someone on your ship while carrying that cargo, like killing someone on their ship while carrying that cargo.....etc.There could be so many ways in which rep can be tallied, even in very small portions depending on the severity/or lack thereof in any given situation/circumstance.
And, definitely, rep for taking cargo from another's ship and getting it onto your own....and SHOCKER, delivering that cargo to an outpost. Get rep and gold for turning it in but also gaining rep for having stolen that treasure.
So many ways in which the game could reward any/all methods, tactics, outcomes, etc.@savagetwinky
only because you're stuck in defending a negative position....rather than conceding that you're stuck in defending a negative position and cooperating at making the idea better and better. Which is what this forum is for and what RARE wants from it.I could continue to try and 'work' on convincing you but you're definitely stuck. You're holding to the position that every part of this idea is wrong and if you budge even just one toe, you'll feel that to be failure.
It's ok if you don't like the idea....i wonder though, why do you stick around?
You've said your peace...go...get that horizon.@wafflingsumo I don't think this will help anything.. you are reducing the rewards from a PvE perspective, unless they have had the loot for a long time but then the problems stated in the OP will be even more relevant. It is going to encourage the mentality of players fleeing, and if anything be an even more deflating experience than what currently exists if players do lose their loot.
@PumpkinKangaroo I'm glad you have a shared experience. Going to an outpost frequently is as good tactic but like you say the idea that you are essentially forced to if you don't want to get 0, when 3 islands are close together, is really unhealthy for the game. I wouldn't mind taking the risk if I knew I had gained something, if I do sink I can at least know that I have earned something for my time, not nothing. It is such a deflating experience currently. Everything you said reflects my own views and just shows that there are so many out there who feel the same way (OP up to 54 votes now.. and rising slowly..)
@touchdown1504 I've noticed that he does that a lot.. 'you just don't like losing loot' 'you don't like losing to thieves in SoT', where he comes up with these vast assumptions I have no clue, clearly not very good at having a discussion and listening to people. Any conversation with him is pointless. He doesn't like the idea, but isn't mature enough to say so and has to misrepresent our views in order to make his own thoughts appear more valid to himself.
@lil-fokker
I'm not stuck. I see this as a video game and attempt to understand the mechanics of the entertainment value that's being created. You compared it to job... that's completely asinine. You see it through that prism your ideas aren't necessarily good ideas.There are 3 things I won't budge on. I think they make the game unique experience and
part of the fun.- loot is a mcguffin for players to fight over, it should be the most valuable thing in the game
- There shouldn't be value on tasks during moment to moment gameplay keeping all choices free and open
- Equality in player strength
It's probably been mentioned somewhere, but.... I think a good option would be to create either 1 or 2 (at opposite ends of the world) protected outposts. Said outposts would deploy AI defenses against any player that uses weapons in the outpost radius. Using this outpost would be taxed from your gold reserves (1000 or something that makes it not the default choice) and any treasures turned in would also be taxed at say 10 or 20 percent. Also, reputation would be less (same rate as treasure tax). This would help pve players with a lot of loot, and encourage more than 1 voyage at a time thus a larger pool of sweeter targets for pvp players. As a side note, on these "safe" outposts, the taverns could be a meeting place for in game socializing via chatting, mini games (drinking grog games, poker (betting in game gold or treasure maps or purchased items) tables etc... The in game social part is missing and this could really increase appeal for a group of gamers that feel SOT is missing something...
@angrycoconut16 The problem with this conversation is there is a select few...regardless of what is said will automatically defend against the thought or idea. These are the exact same select few that I have seen salty in no less than three other threads about game mechanics THEY want changed...core fundamentals and all (whatever that is supposed to mean).
It is also disconcerting to think that the these same people were not here for alpha, possibly beta. Yet, they speak as if nothing has been gone over before in the test forums and the insider forums. Speak with an air of authority as if they know it all, are the resident experts and no one else can possibly know what is good. this is why I simply quit reading. I pop in and skim a bit here and there.
The bottom line truth is, there WILL be a change in the rewards system...mark my words, that little announcement about the "less castaways at higher voyage levels"....Just the beginning. I guarantee there is more planned and it is being rolled in one piece at a time! Quote me on it...it will happen. I just know...I will leave it at that.
@pumpkinkangaroo said in Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.:
Those arguing against this idea keep saying that PvE players can just outpost hop to keep the value of their goods so Rep on VC isn't necessary. I can tell you I do outpost hop and it gets really old. 3 islands close together that I'm to visit and an outpost a ways off but in order to insure I get the credit I have to do one island, outpost, another island, outpost.
That is a complete mischaracterization of what was said. What I said was, essentially, to take a risk assessment. I do one before I start based on the number of chests, and then I do it again at an island based on what chests they were and what I have on board already. Basically, you determine your comfort level: 'how much loot am I comfortable carrying and will I feel like I'm wasting my entire session if I lose it?' For me, there comes a point where if I take on more, I would be really, really upset to lose it. That is the point at which I head to an outpost - may be after 1 island, may be after 2, 3, 5... depends on the circumstances. But, if a player is feeling like they've lost everything and hates the game because of it, they are carrying more than they are willing to risk... that's on them. The game doesn't need to change to accommodate someone who is taking on extra risk but doesn't want to face the potential consequences of taking that risk.
@savagetwinky said in Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.:
There are 3 things I won't budge on. I think they make the game unique experience and
part of the fun.- loot is a mcguffin for players to fight over, it should be the most valuable thing in the game
- There shouldn't be value on tasks during moment to moment gameplay keeping all choices free and open
- Equality in player strength
His ideas are not necessarily bad either! If he compared it to the misery of a job...then perhaps that is how it feels, and how it feels to him is his business, not yours to tell him how it is supposed to feel!
Neat Ideas. Your list of 3. #1 loot is already the most valuable thing in the game. Not an issue. #2 there should be value (Experience points) on "tasks" such as killing a skeleton, Kraken defeat, etc. Your opinion is noted, the majority (in this thread) feels different...yay democracy!
#3 Agree here. I like this part of the game. It will stay this way, that much has been made clear, and I don't see a lot of complaints to the contrary.Anyhow, as I mentioned before. I am not here to argue, nor will I. I am also not here to change anyone's mind. I stated my ideas and opinions. You don't have to like them, as far as I am concerned, they are the best ideas in this thread, my mind won't change on that. And, I promise, we will see change in the rewards system, it has already begun! No doubts in my mind at all.
@touchdown1504 said in Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.:
@lotrmith No...That is not at all my point. Never has been, never will be. I can give two s***s about losing gold. I do care about losing Reputation
What the hell did I say about gold? Please read. It's nested in the quote.
Also I didn't say you. I said the players you're hoping to help.
@touchdown1504 said in Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.:
Neat Ideas. Your list of 3. #1 loot is already the most valuable thing in the game. Not an issue. #2 there should be value (Experience points) on "tasks" such as killing a skeleton, Kraken defeat, etc. Your opinion is noted, the majority (in this thread) feels different...yay democracy!
#3 Agree here. I like this part of the game. It will stay this way, that much has been made clear, and I don't see a lot of complaints to the contrary.One way to make #2 more viable with the current game set up is if the commendations actually gave you more than a meager sliver of rep. That would mean that completing voyages, clearing forts, sailing miles actually did more than just hand you a warm fuzzy. If there was reall GAIN from those, people would be more likely to work to achieve those, then even if your loot was stolen, you still get that 'credit' for the achievement.
@mintprizma I can dig this! The issue I have with commendations is they are a repeat of what you have already done (for the most part) ya' know, 10 foul skulls, 20 Captain's Chests, 50 snakes and so on. So, in a sense that is already the built in "Reputation Bonus" in the game. I agree it needs to be cranked up...WAY up. The other thing I believe would help, and I mentioned this earlier is make gold more valuable. Truthfully the only way to do this, is make promotions a lot more expensive. This would raise gold value for everyone, because not everyone cares about cosmetics, but everyone does want to promote! These two things, and move reputation to "Voyage Complete" would be a system I could support.
@lotrmith said in Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.:
@touchdown1504 said in Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.:
@lotrmith No...That is not at all my point. Never has been, never will be. I can give two s***s about losing gold. I do care about losing Reputation
What the hell did I say about gold? Please read. It's nested in the quote.
Also I didn't say you. I said the players you're hoping to help.
I asked you once if you are going to quote me, give a full quote for clarity, at least a full sentence, add bold or italics if you like to provide emphasis. But quit cutting my sentences. This one should have ended "AKA Experience Points". No you did not say gold, you referenced total value of all loot...which infers both gold and reputation. So I told YOU I don't care about gold! I only care about reputation.
I am not hoping to "help" anyone. Nobody needs "help". Nobody is in danger here. I am supporting an idea, a thought, that is supported by a bunch of other players. Dude...just pretend I am invisible...we will both be happier for it. I can only deal with so much nonsense in one day. Mithandriel...LOL...he would be ashamed you carry that name!
@touchdown1504 said in Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.:
@lotrmith said in Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.:
@touchdown1504 said in Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.:
@lotrmith No...That is not at all my point. Never has been, never will be. I can give two s***s about losing gold. I do care about losing Reputation
What the hell did I say about gold? Please read. It's nested in the quote.
Also I didn't say you. I said the players you're hoping to help.
I asked you once if you are going to quote me, give a full quote for clarity, at least a full sentence, add bold or italics if you like to provide emphasis. But quit cutting my sentences. This one should have ended "AKA Experience Points". No you did not say gold, you referenced total value of all loot...which infers both gold and reputation. So I told YOU I don't care about gold! I only care about reputation.
I am not hoping to "help" anyone. Nobody needs "help". Nobody is in danger here. I am supporting an idea, a thought, that is supported by a bunch of other players. Dude...just pretend I am invisible...we will both be happier for it. I can only deal with so much nonsense in one day. Mithandriel...LOL...he would be ashamed you carry that name!
You care about the rep that is attached to the loot. AKA the loot. Quit being daft.
@lotrmith Daft? Again you obviously know what I meant. You obviously know I see the rep and gold as different rewards...well...because they are. Seriously man. You know what, nevermind. Believe what you will. Have a great rest of your day. Change your gamer tag, you are sullying a good name.
@touchdown1504 said in Reputation - loss, risk and negativity.:
@lotrmith Daft? Again you obviously know what I meant. You obviously know I see the rep and gold as different rewards...well...because they are. Seriously man. You know what, nevermind. Believe what you will. Have a great rest of your day. Change your gamer tag, you are sullying a good name.
Please tell me where I said anything about gold. For reference, here is my post that you quoted and then started ranting about gold:
Except that it doesn't balance (not the least of which because you have very poor understandings of the types of players who are involved in fights). In short, you overestimate the risk assessment priorities of those who you are attempting to target with this change. They are not going to be more likely, as you claim, to either initiate a fight or stand their ground instead of run because of any combination of the following: The bulk of the rep is still attached to their loot. They simply don't like losing their loot to other players. This change, and really no change, actually improves their odds of not losing their loot.
528 out of 800
