Best Of

I mean this is boob plate and it looks interesting

Its possible to make realistic armor that accentuates the female form to some extent. It might not always be practical and emphasizing breasts too much could be detrimental, but it didn't stop real men from making giant cod pieces or muscle armor in history, so why should it stop women in fantasy?

Nagash wrote: »

Azryil wrote: »

Two corruption threads closed....going for three?

What have you done this has been dead for months

I didn't do shit, I responded to the necro.....and he(or a mod) deleted his comment.

--Actually it looks like all of Ikcen's posts got nuked from orbit.

Azryil wrote: »

Two corruption threads closed....going for three?

What have you done this has been dead for months

Ikcen wrote: »

If I combine the insults and the griefing, then what will you do? They maybe not exactly insults. Just ugly questions.

I know how I will react. I will be angry.

Also you imagine a pretty empty game. If AOC becomes popular, it will be overcrowded. There will be queue for entering into the game. Maybe even hours. And the competition for every mob will be fearsome.

Then what will you do when someone starts to KS?

The fact is I have experience with that system, while you do not.

If you get angry from strangers talking smack or being annoying that's on you. I've played enough games and dealt with enough internet trolls to know how to ignore people. If people act like trolls that's fine, it won't bother me. If people make comments that break TOS I'll just report it and continue to play. Not everyone is going to start fighting because people called them names.

And I don't imagine AOC to be an empty game? But with how big the map is and with how much the development team will be monitoring the game I HIGHLY doubt that (excluding launch day) there will ever be "queues for hours" because that's less about popularity and more about server management at that point. And if there is competition for "every" mob that is once again server management.

I've already said I don't let kill stealing bother me a couple of times already. I've dealt with it a ton in other games. I'll either ask the person if they are there for a quest or to grind and if I need to I'll just move to another spot. It's not a big deal to me.

And not sure what makes you think I don't have experience with a corruption system? Literally said earlier I used to play Black Desert, and yes I know all about their issues. But even the article you posted gave alternatives to deal with griefers.

These are my thoughts and this is how I play games. So please stop making assumptions about peoples play styles or history.

Ikcen wrote: »

It seem you do not get it. Or you do not want to get it. I do not say that caravans do not work. I say the players who carry good obviously will not have motivation to use them.

50 minutes vs 83 hours a a whole lot of motivation.

Dygz wrote: »

You keep using the word semantics.
I'm not talking about the meaning of words.
I'm stating that just like a whole chicken is different than half a chicken or two chickens.... normal death penalty is different than half death penalty or double death penalty.

First you state it's semantics.
Then you state it has nothing to do with semantics.
You are the one with no clue about what you're talking about. As usual.

Non-combatants do not receive 200% the death penalty.
Non-combatants receive 100% the death penalty.
Combatants receive 50% the death penalty.
Corrupted could receive 200% the death penalty.
I'm not discussing the words. I'm discussing the concepts.

...You're kind of an idiot if you can unironically say "Non-combatants receive 100% the death penalty.
Combatants receive 50% the death penalty." while claiming someone's being dishonest when they tell you non-combatants get higher death penalties than combatants.

And yes, you're talking about the meaning of words, phrases etc etc, which have the same meaning, and then you're claiming one of them is wrong. Your past comment history doesn't seem to point to being a troll, but in this one you sure are going at it to prove otherwise.

Hardly anyone is even saying its a bad thing non-combatants lose more than a combatant, you're just being contrary for literally no reason.

One of the issues I have with the corruption system is the greater penalty for greens. I get that this game has lots of PVP. I just don't get why non-combatants are penalized for not fighting back. There is a corruption system to deter griefers. But if you fight back, you turn purple and thereby bypass the corruption system. The best way to actually activate the corruption system is to not fight back. But then you lose more.

Is there an easy way to understand why using the corruption system to deter griefers penalizes the person more for supporting that system?

And I agree with @Atama on the red attacking a green causing even more grief as the green doesn't change. I am not sure if that is what IS wants as well.

Greetings

Howdy