Runes of Magic US / AU

Quoted from "trav42073;495006"

Love this.


and mmocowboy, anyone who does a search of your posts, threads, will get a quick understanding of what you are. so how goes that hoto run? make it yet ? lol

Quoted from "SwordofOmens;495408"

I vote no because as it stands it will be almost impossible to ever get a gate down with the siege engines. Regardless of their health or defenses, which is EXTREMELY lacking for the siege engines, they are WAY to buggy. They get stuck, players get stuck in them, they fly up into the sky, or fall through the ground. If you make it across to the enemy gate they get 1 shot or close to it by end-gamers. Making the gates, buildings, ect. immune to player damage will NEVER be a viable option until the siege engines themselves are fixed, first (as in not in the same patch, please).

You could argue that everything needs to be updated to meet CH 4 standards for elites. That would make things more challenging and still make it possible for low level guilds, assuming they fix the siege engine stability. Lvl 200?! That imho is a bit extreme, though...

Quoted from "SwordofOmens;495594"

Reread the suggestion why? Ok let me make 1 more point so you can tell I did read it and still say no.

Players SHOULD be able to damage siege engines. Like I said before they just need to be beefed up to level 70 elite status and/or have the same player damage reducing effects that gates have now.

Quoted from "KatalanOrk;495852"

So, the idea is that everything should be completely balanced to players that have only quest gear, unmodified.

Siege, and PvP in general, should offer no incentive whatsoever to gear up, spend money or effort in the game.

Basically you want all the players that spend hours and hours making their gear, get no advantage whatsoever from doing so as you don't want to put in an equivalent effort. And you want to blame it all on favouring only players that pay heavily.

Is that it? It is not about making Siege more tactical, but it is meant to remove any benefit from improving your toon for Siege.

I don't really think that is going to help the game.

Perhaps you need to look at the game from a wider perspective, not just your own. The game must be balanced to the most advanced players, as otherwise their efforts, time and money are not rewarded and they will leave. And as they are the most dedicated players and set the benchmark for all other players to try to match, they are also the incentive that pushes people to play more, harder, better, or reach into their pockets and fill Frogster's.

I know a guy that made 16 accounts to run the Sacillian Steppes minigame when it was released for Fatal runes. I would rather castrate myself with a cheese-grater standing under a shower of aftershave rather than run a minigame 16 times a day, everyday, and so I will never be able to even slightly compete with those that do. Or spend more that 5 hours a day in game, or spend $$$'s every month. That doesn't mean that the game should be balanced to my level, it means that I will just always fall short without help from friends and the temptation to spend will always be there, as it should be.

This game isn't about you. It is about everyone, whether they are no-lifers or rich daddy's boys or whatever other insults you want to throw at dedicated people that put real effort, time and money into the game. I find the game very rewarding for a casual player as well, but you can't expect everything to be entirely pitched to the casual level. You have to accept that if other people try harder or spend more, they are going to be better and rightly so.

Quoted from "KatalanOrk;495882"

According to you, only players that pay to win (omg isn't that awful, players paying for diamonds - really they should be banned for such an offence) should be geared. No one else can have any kind of gear.

You want % damage, engines that are wholly impervious to player damage, which are at least 2 ideas that mean you could be naked or endgame geared toon and it would make no difference.

Quoted from "KatalanOrk;495903"

Perhaps you have difficulty remembering but it was you that brought up the issue of pay-to-win because someone disagreed with your idea.

Perhaps if you could stay on topic rather than making ad hominem attacks against everyone that disagrees with you, the idea of Siege Engines role in Siege would be better discussed.

Quoted from "SwordofOmens;495917"

Actually, you are the one that was confused. I never made a pay-to-win suggestion and since you were replying to my post, you are wrong.