Maintenance for the week of September 29:
• PC/Mac: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – September 29, 4:00AM EDT (8:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EDT (13:00 UTC)
• Xbox: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – October 1, 8:00 UTC (4:00AM EDT) - 16:00 UTC (12:00PM EDT)
• PlayStation®: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – October 1, 8:00 UTC (4:00AM EDT) - 16:00 UTC (12:00PM EDT)
• PC/Mac: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – September 29, 4:00AM EDT (8:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EDT (13:00 UTC)
• Xbox: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – October 1, 8:00 UTC (4:00AM EDT) - 16:00 UTC (12:00PM EDT)
• PlayStation®: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – October 1, 8:00 UTC (4:00AM EDT) - 16:00 UTC (12:00PM EDT)
The PvP Justice System Concept, now with opt-out
-
Dubhliam✭✭✭✭✭
✭Clerics1985 wrote: »just put a Diablo 2 "hostile" button and Let the world go to town. don't wanna fight? cool don't "hostile" you see someone whoopin up on a NPC that you deem Unnecessary?does he have hostility clicked? click the hostile button and Go to town. At least then we would have a real way to guage just how many PVER's Wouldn't/won't participate.
There have been many suggestions with the "opt in" solutions in the past, and I have considered it.
The main reason I have decided not to include a complete "opt out" system is because I think the Justice system is not exciting enough in itself as it is right now.
This concept is not here only to promote PvP fights, this is mainly to improve on an incomplete and dull Justice System we currently have.
And many will agree that the current Justice System is in dire need of improvements.1 -
Divinius✭✭✭✭✭
✭As you have said, there have been plenty of threads on this subject, and plenty of dead horses beaten.
Time to leave it alone. It simply isn't going to happen. Accept it and move on to help influence the shape of the additional PvP content that we have been told is going to happen rather than continuing the pointless dialogue about something that isn't going to happen.
This. 100%.
I can appreciate the amount of thought and effort that went into the multi-post OP, but it was ultimately a waste of time, since no PvP justice system will ever fly.
I fully agree that many facets of the existing justice system could be greatly improved, and therefore feel that the OP's time would be far better spent investigating multiple ways that the existing justice system could be improved that would NOT involve any PvP aspects.2 -
Tan9oSuccka✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭Clerics1985 wrote: »just put a Diablo 2 "hostile" button and Let the world go to town. don't wanna fight? cool don't "hostile" you see someone whoopin up on a NPC that you deem Unnecessary?does he have hostility clicked? click the hostile button and Go to town. At least then we would have a real way to guage just how many PVER's Wouldn't/won't participate.
There have been many suggestions with the "opt in" solutions in the past, and I have considered it.
The main reason I have decided not to include a complete "opt out" system is because I think the Justice system is not exciting enough in itself as it is right now.
This concept is not here only to promote PvP fights, this is mainly to improve on an incomplete and dull Justice System we currently have.
And many will agree that the current Justice System is in dire need of improvements.
I can only imagine what a disaster this would be. No opt-out option? All these threads have a common theme: I want to kill unsuspecting, unequiped PVE players for thrills.
Towns would be littered with PVP'ers looking to gank. Try going to Cropsford in Cyrodiil questing. Shoot a revealing flare in the area of the quest givers. I did that once, and uncovered 12 banana's just sitting crouched.
Fun, right? No thanks.
5 -
Dubhliam✭✭✭✭✭
✭Tan9oSuccka wrote: »Clerics1985 wrote: »just put a Diablo 2 "hostile" button and Let the world go to town. don't wanna fight? cool don't "hostile" you see someone whoopin up on a NPC that you deem Unnecessary?does he have hostility clicked? click the hostile button and Go to town. At least then we would have a real way to guage just how many PVER's Wouldn't/won't participate.
There have been many suggestions with the "opt in" solutions in the past, and I have considered it.
The main reason I have decided not to include a complete "opt out" system is because I think the Justice system is not exciting enough in itself as it is right now.
This concept is not here only to promote PvP fights, this is mainly to improve on an incomplete and dull Justice System we currently have.
And many will agree that the current Justice System is in dire need of improvements.
I can only imagine what a disaster this would be. No opt-out option? All these threads have a common theme: I want to kill unsuspecting, unequiped PVE players for thrills.
Towns would be littered with PVP'ers looking to gank. Try going to Cropsford in Cyrodiil questing. Shoot a revealing flare in the area of the quest givers. I did that once, and uncovered 12 banana's just sitting crouched.
Fun, right? No thanks.
Please read the full suggestion.
A criminal with a bounty getting caught, then willingly choosing the "Flee" option is hardly unsuspecting, is he?
FUGITIVE- The highest heat level- Fugitive can now be only triggered by the "Flee dialogue" when accosted by a guard or Enforcer while being Disreputable or Notorious. This does not apply in Trespassing areas.
... - Players with the Fugitive heat are marked for PvP, making them attackable by Guards and Enforcers.
...
Once again, the people opposed to PvP Justice have no idea what they are opposing.4 - The highest heat level- Fugitive can now be only triggered by the "Flee dialogue" when accosted by a guard or Enforcer while being Disreputable or Notorious. This does not apply in Trespassing areas.
-
SirCritical✭✭✭✭✭notimetocare wrote: »Tons of well thought out work, but no. PvP doesn't belong in pve. Leave it that way.
Lots of players saying this "no PvP in PvE zones", but do you see now other players fighting others in the PvE zones? Yes. Do you care now, with whom they're fighting? No. Would you care this fight between outlaws and enforcers, if it won't give you any pros or cons? Don't think so. Then why is this idea so embarrassing for you, if there would be the possibility to avoid it completely?
This game sadly lacks of any goals in PvE to fight for. Sure, there are endgame BoP sets, leaderboards and achievements. But admit it: the biggest challenge is in the - cheatless - PvP, saying this as an amateur in PvP. If you want to challenge other players in an MMO, the best option is the PvP. And this game lacks of the traditional PvP-aspects, like small scale, arena based, capture the flag etc. This enforcer-system, well written by OP is fantastic. Gives us more options to encounter other players. Moreover, I would add player-pickpocketing as well
(Sry for grammar.)2 -
Parrotbrain✭✭✭Excellent idea. I read through the entire suggestion and I fully agree with the OPs suggestions. The ideas have been well fleshed out and a lot of the points that the naysayers have been beating on have been addressed. I feel there was a cop out from Zenimax when they made the announcement a while back about not including the enforcer system. Something like this would inject a lot of life and excitement back into the game again. Well done, OP 4 -
josefcifkaeb17_ESO✭✭✭✭I was really looking forward to this. I hate normal pvp, but I always enjoyed this kind of open world pvp. And now that alliance restriction are dropping completely it would be really awesome. Shame it's one of the many promises ZOS won't fullfil.
Stealing things and killing NPC's even if caught doing it is basically without a punishment (with all those passives we have nowadays)
How I miss spellcrafting -_-Edited by josefcifkaeb17_ESO on July 8, 2016 8:55AM(つ -‘ _ ‘- )つ ▇ ▅ █ ▅ ▇ ▂ ▃ ▁ ▁ ▅ ▃ ▅ ▅ ▄ ▅ ▇ ༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ1 -
STEVIL✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭
I always wondered this what if ZOS did a game wide poll and this system was voted to he added to the game.What would all the nay sayers say then if it shows truly that the vast majority wants this added to the game.Not to mentioned 500-1000 people is a good simple sizes for a company.If the majority of those sampled like a idea a normal company would work on it.notimetocare wrote: »All the previous threads were heavily debated whether this system would be good or not.
Note that two polls were done, both of which heavily favored the implementation.
@Lefty_Lucy 's thread had an astounding 75% vote for PvP Justice.
The concerns of those that didn't want to see it implemented were mostly about griefing and exploiting. And it was very hard for me to reason with those people.
Now that you are presented with a detailed concept on which you can comment your concerns, all your arguments fall down to:
"Just leave it alone"
So much for arguments.
If you have nothing constructive to add to this discussion, I would kindly ask you to refrain from posting.
One of my threads already got closed in the past because the discussion got heated and it pretty much down boiled to "I said this, you said that".
Instead, you can comb through my concept and look for holes in the system where it can be abused or improved upon.
Polls are biased by being only the forum base. Polls by popular streamers are even more biased because of that streamers followerbase. It totalled 600 votes, 450 yes votes is led than he had in stream followers. Really think that is a valid poll?
Sample size is IRRELEVANT if the sample set is radically skewed.
Go look at any of the "how many cp you got" threads and get an idea how "representative" the forum is for the "average" gamer at 200-300 cp or the half-ish below that.
basically, its like democracy... four foxes and a chicken voting on what's for dinner.
My bet would be most people wouldn't care about it until they realized "wait what why did i just get ganked in the mage's guild?" By then it would be too late.
JEXIT?
Proudly skooma free while talks-when-drunk is in mandatory public housing.
YFMV Your Fun May Vary.
First Law of Nerf-o-Dynamics
"The good way I used to get good kills *with good skill* was good but the way others kill me now is bad."1 -
Tan9oSuccka✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭Tan9oSuccka wrote: »Clerics1985 wrote: »just put a Diablo 2 "hostile" button and Let the world go to town. don't wanna fight? cool don't "hostile" you see someone whoopin up on a NPC that you deem Unnecessary?does he have hostility clicked? click the hostile button and Go to town. At least then we would have a real way to guage just how many PVER's Wouldn't/won't participate.
There have been many suggestions with the "opt in" solutions in the past, and I have considered it.
The main reason I have decided not to include a complete "opt out" system is because I think the Justice system is not exciting enough in itself as it is right now.
This concept is not here only to promote PvP fights, this is mainly to improve on an incomplete and dull Justice System we currently have.
And many will agree that the current Justice System is in dire need of improvements.
I can only imagine what a disaster this would be. No opt-out option? All these threads have a common theme: I want to kill unsuspecting, unequiped PVE players for thrills.
Towns would be littered with PVP'ers looking to gank. Try going to Cropsford in Cyrodiil questing. Shoot a revealing flare in the area of the quest givers. I did that once, and uncovered 12 banana's just sitting crouched.
Fun, right? No thanks.
Please read the full suggestion.
A criminal with a bounty getting caught, then willingly choosing the "Flee" option is hardly unsuspecting, is he?
FUGITIVE- The highest heat level- Fugitive can now be only triggered by the "Flee dialogue" when accosted by a guard or Enforcer while being Disreputable or Notorious. This does not apply in Trespassing areas.
... - Players with the Fugitive heat are marked for PvP, making them attackable by Guards and Enforcers.
...
Once again, the people opposed to PvP Justice have no idea what they are opposing.
I know exactly what I'm opposing. While I appreciate the time it took to outline your plan, it would be a disaster.
What happens to heal powers like breath of life? Does it heal the "Enforcer" or "Criminal"? If the criminal, do you get a bounty? What about groups? If my buddy clicks on a stolen item from a weapon rack on accident, I'm supposed to let some PVP vigilante schlub kill him?
There are just too many things to account for. ZOS scrapped this idea for good reason. Players would exploit/grief to no end with it.
5 - The highest heat level- Fugitive can now be only triggered by the "Flee dialogue" when accosted by a guard or Enforcer while being Disreputable or Notorious. This does not apply in Trespassing areas.
-
Divinius✭✭✭✭✭
✭
And once again, people in favor of adding PvP to the justice system can't seem to understand why the people who oppose it, do.Once again, the people opposed to PvP Justice have no idea what they are opposing.
There should NEVER be PvP repercussions to PvE actions. Period. End of story. I don't care how many hoops players need to jump though to finally activate the PvP aspect, if it is activated via PvE actions (including fleeing from a guard) it's unacceptable.
3 -
NeillMcAttack✭✭✭✭✭
✭Tan9oSuccka wrote: »Tan9oSuccka wrote: »Clerics1985 wrote: »just put a Diablo 2 "hostile" button and Let the world go to town. don't wanna fight? cool don't "hostile" you see someone whoopin up on a NPC that you deem Unnecessary?does he have hostility clicked? click the hostile button and Go to town. At least then we would have a real way to guage just how many PVER's Wouldn't/won't participate.
There have been many suggestions with the "opt in" solutions in the past, and I have considered it.
The main reason I have decided not to include a complete "opt out" system is because I think the Justice system is not exciting enough in itself as it is right now.
This concept is not here only to promote PvP fights, this is mainly to improve on an incomplete and dull Justice System we currently have.
And many will agree that the current Justice System is in dire need of improvements.
I can only imagine what a disaster this would be. No opt-out option? All these threads have a common theme: I want to kill unsuspecting, unequiped PVE players for thrills.
Towns would be littered with PVP'ers looking to gank. Try going to Cropsford in Cyrodiil questing. Shoot a revealing flare in the area of the quest givers. I did that once, and uncovered 12 banana's just sitting crouched.
Fun, right? No thanks.
Please read the full suggestion.
A criminal with a bounty getting caught, then willingly choosing the "Flee" option is hardly unsuspecting, is he?
FUGITIVE- The highest heat level- Fugitive can now be only triggered by the "Flee dialogue" when accosted by a guard or Enforcer while being Disreputable or Notorious. This does not apply in Trespassing areas.
... - Players with the Fugitive heat are marked for PvP, making them attackable by Guards and Enforcers.
...
Once again, the people opposed to PvP Justice have no idea what they are opposing.
I know exactly what I'm opposing. While I appreciate the time it took to outline your plan, it would be a disaster.
What happens to heal powers like breath of life? Does it heal the "Enforcer" or "Criminal"? If the criminal, do you get a bounty? What about groups? If my buddy clicks on a stolen item from a weapon rack on accident, I'm supposed to let some PVP vigilante schlub kill him?
There are just too many things to account for. ZOS scrapped this idea for good reason. Players would exploit/grief to no end with it.
You could just have it so no outside influence is allowed. And also, the OP has already informed you that only when the flee option is chosen would you be flagged, so accidentally stealing is already accounted for in this implementation. So what is it that you are opposed to really? And before you answer this time, perhaps you could re-read the OP's suggestions to make make sure he hasn't already addressed your concerns.PC EU - NoCP PvP, is real PvPTiidehunter Nord StamDK EP PvP MainLegion Commander Tresdin Stamplar DC PvE MainSephirith Altmer MagPlar EP Gondar the Bounty Hunter Khajiit StamBlade DCThe Dirge Redguard StamNecro EP Disruptor Stormcrafter Nord StamSorc ADLone Druid Bosmer Stam Warden EP Necro-Phos Argonian MagBlade AD@ McAttack in gamePlayed since beta, and then on console at release, until the game became unplayable on console.4 - The highest heat level- Fugitive can now be only triggered by the "Flee dialogue" when accosted by a guard or Enforcer while being Disreputable or Notorious. This does not apply in Trespassing areas.
-
NeillMcAttack✭✭✭✭✭
✭
And once again, people in favor of adding PvP to the justice system can't seem to understand why the people who oppose it, do.Once again, the people opposed to PvP Justice have no idea what they are opposing.
There should NEVER be PvP repercussions to PvE actions. Period. End of story. I don't care how many hoops players need to jump though to finally activate the PvP aspect, if it is activated via PvE actions (including fleeing from a guard) it's unacceptable.
So you are happy with the current justice system? You don't feel it's bland or boring and has a very short shelf life?PC EU - NoCP PvP, is real PvPTiidehunter Nord StamDK EP PvP MainLegion Commander Tresdin Stamplar DC PvE MainSephirith Altmer MagPlar EP Gondar the Bounty Hunter Khajiit StamBlade DCThe Dirge Redguard StamNecro EP Disruptor Stormcrafter Nord StamSorc ADLone Druid Bosmer Stam Warden EP Necro-Phos Argonian MagBlade AD@ McAttack in gamePlayed since beta, and then on console at release, until the game became unplayable on console.1 -
Divinius✭✭✭✭✭
✭
So sick of hearing this as the immediate response...NeillMcAttack wrote: »
And once again, people in favor of adding PvP to the justice system can't seem to understand why the people who oppose it, do.Once again, the people opposed to PvP Justice have no idea what they are opposing.
There should NEVER be PvP repercussions to PvE actions. Period. End of story. I don't care how many hoops players need to jump though to finally activate the PvP aspect, if it is activated via PvE actions (including fleeing from a guard) it's unacceptable.
So you are happy with the current justice system? You don't feel it's bland or boring and has a very short shelf life?
I will be the first to admit that the current justice system is bland and boring. And as I've said many times before, there are many things that could be done to improve the system, without adding any PvP aspect.
Adding PvP is not the only way to improve the justice system.2 -
Dubhliam✭✭✭✭✭
✭
So sick of hearing this as the immediate response...NeillMcAttack wrote: »
And once again, people in favor of adding PvP to the justice system can't seem to understand why the people who oppose it, do.Once again, the people opposed to PvP Justice have no idea what they are opposing.
There should NEVER be PvP repercussions to PvE actions. Period. End of story. I don't care how many hoops players need to jump though to finally activate the PvP aspect, if it is activated via PvE actions (including fleeing from a guard) it's unacceptable.
So you are happy with the current justice system? You don't feel it's bland or boring and has a very short shelf life?
I will be the first to admit that the current justice system is bland and boring. And as I've said many times before, there are many things that could be done to improve the system, without adding any PvP aspect.
Adding PvP is not the only way to improve the justice system.
It's true.
It's not the only way.
But I don't see a version of the PvE Justice System that would highly improve on what we have currently.
Also, looking from a perspective that this is a highly sought after improvement, how would you justify spending valuable resources and not delivering something players demand in high numbers.Tan9oSuccka wrote: »Tan9oSuccka wrote: »Clerics1985 wrote: »just put a Diablo 2 "hostile" button and Let the world go to town. don't wanna fight? cool don't "hostile" you see someone whoopin up on a NPC that you deem Unnecessary?does he have hostility clicked? click the hostile button and Go to town. At least then we would have a real way to guage just how many PVER's Wouldn't/won't participate.
There have been many suggestions with the "opt in" solutions in the past, and I have considered it.
The main reason I have decided not to include a complete "opt out" system is because I think the Justice system is not exciting enough in itself as it is right now.
This concept is not here only to promote PvP fights, this is mainly to improve on an incomplete and dull Justice System we currently have.
And many will agree that the current Justice System is in dire need of improvements.
I can only imagine what a disaster this would be. No opt-out option? All these threads have a common theme: I want to kill unsuspecting, unequiped PVE players for thrills.
Towns would be littered with PVP'ers looking to gank. Try going to Cropsford in Cyrodiil questing. Shoot a revealing flare in the area of the quest givers. I did that once, and uncovered 12 banana's just sitting crouched.
Fun, right? No thanks.
Please read the full suggestion.
A criminal with a bounty getting caught, then willingly choosing the "Flee" option is hardly unsuspecting, is he?
FUGITIVE- The highest heat level- Fugitive can now be only triggered by the "Flee dialogue" when accosted by a guard or Enforcer while being Disreputable or Notorious. This does not apply in Trespassing areas.
... - Players with the Fugitive heat are marked for PvP, making them attackable by Guards and Enforcers.
...
Once again, the people opposed to PvP Justice have no idea what they are opposing.
I know exactly what I'm opposing. While I appreciate the time it took to outline your plan, it would be a disaster.
What happens to heal powers like breath of life? Does it heal the "Enforcer" or "Criminal"? If the criminal, do you get a bounty? What about groups? If my buddy clicks on a stolen item from a weapon rack on accident, I'm supposed to let some PVP vigilante schlub kill him?
There are just too many things to account for. ZOS scrapped this idea for good reason. Players would exploit/grief to no end with it.
Actually, you don't. You have not read my detailed concept, if you had, you would have noticed there are a lot of rules into place to prevent exactly that what you are describing.
What you are opposing is your own vision of how you think it would be implemented.
For your information, to clarify (so you don't have to read):
Players have a way to prevent accidental PvP tagging: "prevent attacking innocents". It is already partially implemented in the game - you cannot cast Rapid Manouvers while near an NPC if you have that option on. The same would apply with all buffs and heals. Those that don't have that option turned on are in risk of "accidentally" helping a criminal, which is a felony. It would not instantly make you flagged for PvP, but you would get a bounty.
Another thing, that "friend that accidentally clicks on a stolen item from a weapon rack" could not be attacked. Only after getting caught by a Guard or Enforcer and choosing the "Flee" option would he be viable for PvP. And if he would rather fight than pay 55 gold worth of bounty, that is his choice.
Please read, it's all there.
I do however encourage such critical thinking, this is the reason I made the thread - so other players could find possible exploits and we could improve on the concept together.2 - The highest heat level- Fugitive can now be only triggered by the "Flee dialogue" when accosted by a guard or Enforcer while being Disreputable or Notorious. This does not apply in Trespassing areas.
-
clayandaudrey_ESO✭✭✭✭✭
✭First of all how can you say a high number of players want this? You can't possibly know the numbers and how that translates into the number of people who play.
Second it is not going to happen. Your time would be better spent just playing the game or doing something else other than beating this dead horse.Edited by clayandaudrey_ESO on July 8, 2016 2:28PM2 -
Tan9oSuccka✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭NeillMcAttack wrote: »Tan9oSuccka wrote: »Tan9oSuccka wrote: »Clerics1985 wrote: »just put a Diablo 2 "hostile" button and Let the world go to town. don't wanna fight? cool don't "hostile" you see someone whoopin up on a NPC that you deem Unnecessary?does he have hostility clicked? click the hostile button and Go to town. At least then we would have a real way to guage just how many PVER's Wouldn't/won't participate.
There have been many suggestions with the "opt in" solutions in the past, and I have considered it.
The main reason I have decided not to include a complete "opt out" system is because I think the Justice system is not exciting enough in itself as it is right now.
This concept is not here only to promote PvP fights, this is mainly to improve on an incomplete and dull Justice System we currently have.
And many will agree that the current Justice System is in dire need of improvements.
I can only imagine what a disaster this would be. No opt-out option? All these threads have a common theme: I want to kill unsuspecting, unequiped PVE players for thrills.
Towns would be littered with PVP'ers looking to gank. Try going to Cropsford in Cyrodiil questing. Shoot a revealing flare in the area of the quest givers. I did that once, and uncovered 12 banana's just sitting crouched.
Fun, right? No thanks.
Please read the full suggestion.
A criminal with a bounty getting caught, then willingly choosing the "Flee" option is hardly unsuspecting, is he?
FUGITIVE- The highest heat level- Fugitive can now be only triggered by the "Flee dialogue" when accosted by a guard or Enforcer while being Disreputable or Notorious. This does not apply in Trespassing areas.
... - Players with the Fugitive heat are marked for PvP, making them attackable by Guards and Enforcers.
...
Once again, the people opposed to PvP Justice have no idea what they are opposing.
I know exactly what I'm opposing. While I appreciate the time it took to outline your plan, it would be a disaster.
What happens to heal powers like breath of life? Does it heal the "Enforcer" or "Criminal"? If the criminal, do you get a bounty? What about groups? If my buddy clicks on a stolen item from a weapon rack on accident, I'm supposed to let some PVP vigilante schlub kill him?
There are just too many things to account for. ZOS scrapped this idea for good reason. Players would exploit/grief to no end with it.
You could just have it so no outside influence is allowed. And also, the OP has already informed you that only when the flee option is chosen would you be flagged, so accidentally stealing is already accounted for in this implementation. So what is it that you are opposed to really? And before you answer this time, perhaps you could re-read the OP's suggestions to make make sure he hasn't already addressed your concerns.
Oh, how is it accounted for exactly? I'm supposed to willingly surrender 280 gold bounty for a 20 gold item? No thanks, I flee every time.
What's preventing a gank zerg from ravaging one person that chose the flee option?
I will drop it, cause it doesn't really matter. ZOS made the right choice.
3 - The highest heat level- Fugitive can now be only triggered by the "Flee dialogue" when accosted by a guard or Enforcer while being Disreputable or Notorious. This does not apply in Trespassing areas.
-
Divinius✭✭✭✭✭
✭Adding PvP is not the only way to improve the justice system.
It's true.
It's not the only way.
But I don't see a version of the PvE Justice System that would highly improve on what we have currently.
Also, looking from a perspective that this is a highly sought after improvement, how would you justify spending valuable resources and not delivering something players demand in high numbers.
I would support spending resources on improving the Justice system in ways that don't involve any PvP at all, but would never support spending resources on trying to shoehorn PvP into the system. I would justify this the same way I've justified it in many of the other threads on this topic. I'll explain it again here, in hopes that maybe some day people like you will eventually start to understand...
There are people that like PvP and people that don't. I'll even concede that the people that like it are probably the majority.
Most of the people that don't like it, REALLY don't like it, and want no part of it at all. They may be a minority, but they are not an insignificant number.
The people that like PvP have places they can go to do it, and the people that don't can stay out of those places.
As soon as you add PvP to some place in the game that doesn't currently have it (by ANY means) you start to cut off that section of the game from the people that don't like PvP. In this case, that place is virtually everywhere. Limited to certain circumstances, but still, almost everywhere.
Given that, here's why all those "polls" that have been done for whether the PvP justice should be implemented are worthless:
1) The polled sampled of the players is heavily biased, since it's only forum-goers. People that use game forums in general tend to be the more hard-core players, and hard-core players tend to enjoy PvP. Casuals are less likely to use the forums, and therefore less likely to be here to vote in polls. Casuals are more likely to be the people that hate PvP and steer clear of it at all costs. These are all just percentage-based tendencies, not "rules", and I'm aware that there are plenty of exceptions.
2) Even if you completely ignore (or just don't believe) everything in point 1, and assume that the poll results actually are totally accurate, there's another reason they don't matter. Let's say a poll shows 80% in favor, and 20% opposed. Most of those opposed fall into the "very opposed" category. Many of them would actually quit the game, solely due to that decision. Very few (if any) of the people in favor of the system are going to actually quit the game solely based on the decision to not implement PvP justice.
Based on point 2, actually driving away 20% of your players is far worse than just disappointing 80% of them, who aren't going to leave the game solely because PvP justice never happened.
Once again, you can NOT add a PvP consequences to PvE systems that are already in the game, without driving PvE-only players away from that content. ZOS knows this, and made the correct decision.
4 -
Dubhliam✭✭✭✭✭
✭Adding PvP is not the only way to improve the justice system.
It's true.
It's not the only way.
But I don't see a version of the PvE Justice System that would highly improve on what we have currently.
Also, looking from a perspective that this is a highly sought after improvement, how would you justify spending valuable resources and not delivering something players demand in high numbers.
I would support spending resources on improving the Justice system in ways that don't involve any PvP at all, but would never support spending resources on trying to shoehorn PvP into the system. I would justify this the same way I've justified it in many of the other threads on this topic. I'll explain it again here, in hopes that maybe some day people like you will eventually start to understand...
There are people that like PvP and people that don't. I'll even concede that the people that like it are probably the majority.
Most of the people that don't like it, REALLY don't like it, and want no part of it at all. They may be a minority, but they are not an insignificant number.
The people that like PvP have places they can go to do it, and the people that don't can stay out of those places.
As soon as you add PvP to some place in the game that doesn't currently have it (by ANY means) you start to cut off that section of the game from the people that don't like PvP. In this case, that place is virtually everywhere. Limited to certain circumstances, but still, almost everywhere.
Given that, here's why all those "polls" that have been done for whether the PvP justice should be implemented are worthless:
1) The polled sampled of the players is heavily biased, since it's only forum-goers. People that use game forums in general tend to be the more hard-core players, and hard-core players tend to enjoy PvP. Casuals are less likely to use the forums, and therefore less likely to be here to vote in polls. Casuals are more likely to be the people that hate PvP and steer clear of it at all costs. These are all just percentage-based tendencies, not "rules", and I'm aware that there are plenty of exceptions.
2) Even if you completely ignore (or just don't believe) everything in point 1, and assume that the poll results actually are totally accurate, there's another reason they don't matter. Let's say a poll shows 80% in favor, and 20% opposed. Most of those opposed fall into the "very opposed" category. Many of them would actually quit the game, solely due to that decision. Very few (if any) of the people in favor of the system are going to actually quit the game solely based on the decision to not implement PvP justice.
Based on point 2, actually driving away 20% of your players is far worse than just disappointing 80% of them, who aren't going to leave the game solely because PvP justice never happened.
Once again, you can NOT add a PvP consequences to PvE systems that are already in the game, without driving PvE-only players away from that content. ZOS knows this, and made the correct decision.
First of all, people could still participate in the Justice System, and all it has to offer currently without ever actually fighting another player.
All they have to do is not choose the "Flee" option.
Playing this way would ensure they never PvP, yet it would add some dimension to thieving and killing because getting a bounty means you would have to avoid real players, with minds of their own, not some NPC with a standard route you can avoid.
Second, you come here telling me that those polls are invalid because "reasons" yet you claim ALL of the players that voted no would somehow instantly quit because they cannot Flee without being flagged for PvP.
Talk about double standards.0 -
BenLocoDete✭✭✭
This feature would alone help a lot since it does not touch/hurt the anti-PvP orthodoxies and would add a lot of immersion to the whole criminal acting. But it should be based on skills and perks, not just 'go sneak/is invisible' - respect to radius and environment conditions must be given.General- Players can no longer be seen by other players while in stealth unless those players are grouped together. Does not apply in Cyrodiil or Imperial City.
Players being locked into the prison indefinetely is something I do find appealing but it seems that the whole concept of ESO nowadays is "unrestrained casual-friendly gameplay", so for a more reasonable(realistically viable) system, the player, once killed during the prison break, should respawn outside the prison just as if you decided to spend your time(with your items returned, the stolen stuff confiscated and your bounty cleared). Relying on other players is a nuisance(and this is an MMO!) so ZOS seems to avoid it - each new update makes ESO more single-player-friendly.Outlaw prison- To get to the exit, Outlaws have to beat a few mini bosses and a Final boss in the second, PvE part of the prison. Monsters are also aggressive to Enforcers. The Final Boss is stationary, and clairvoyant. The Minibosses cannot be reset once aggroed, and will follow any players still alive until killed.
- Players may only be resurrected by other Outlaws while a Miniboss or Boss fight is ongoing.
What I do believe is possible, is another mixed PvP/PvE scenario. I've seen a lot of people complaining about ganking in the IC and I don't see what is wrong with this. Seems like people just want to take their level 15 characters and go farm powerful ingredients without taking any risks. If anyone can go there and get said items out of an afternoon farm, what's the point with them?
Complaining about not being able to go exploit the AI or any other game mechanic freely isn't going to make a game any good since it is killing the rewards for being a skilled or dedicated player.
If ZOS was something of a good company, the feedback about IC they would have followed is, increase the rewards, make NPCs just as dangerous as other players, and get more features out quickly to really shine that area.
So the overall opinion about your thread is:
1. Professionally put and the design level of your concept is brilliant. I'd love to see even the features I didn't like implemented into the game.
2. Don't think ZOS is capable of implementing such a terrific and complex system at this point since the game is really given up to money grabbing strategies and a shameless hype raising.
Doom rantUnfortunately, since 2014 the QuakeCON ESO strategy is to release little info with just the essential to get people thinking, disregarding the final product. At the 2015 QC this was no different and what is to be expected for this year conference is a reasonable low amount of hype from One Tamriel announcement and a lot of crucial feedback ignored.[slit]Throat[/slit]2 - Players can no longer be seen by other players while in stealth unless those players are grouped together. Does not apply in Cyrodiil or Imperial City.
-
Divinius✭✭✭✭✭
✭
No, they can't.First of all, people could still participate in the Justice System, and all it has to offer currently without ever actually fighting another player.
All they have to do is not choose the "Flee" option.
Playing this way would ensure they never PvP, yet it would add some dimension to thieving and killing because getting a bounty means you would have to avoid real players, with minds of their own, not some NPC with a standard route you can avoid.
Here's just ONE example of many I could come up with. There's an achievement for escaping the guards 100 times. I've gotten this achievement. Under your system, I would have to risk getting PvP ganked 100 times in order to get this PvE achievement. No thank you.
Basically, you are using the same argument I keep seeing in all these threads for the lack of a real "opt-out" from the PvP justice. "Just don't steal things." "Just don't get caught." "Just don't flee guards." None of that works, because in all cases, you are now limiting what the player can do if they want to avoid the PvP that they've been able to avoid all along.
You think the current system is too easy? Fine. I don't care if you make the NPC guards 10 times stronger, and put dozens more of them around. I don't care if you make having a high bounty lock you out of a bunch of other things. I'd even support advances in the system like NPC-run prisons and other cool features. All of that is PvE consequences for PvE actions.
Honestly, I wouldn't even care if they implemented everything you suggested, as long as there is a REAL opt-out option that would allow me to never have to worry about any PvP aspect. So long as there's a game setting that would allow me to do everything I can now, and not ever get myself flagged for PvP, you can have your PvP Justice system. I just want to be able to choose to pretend it doesn't exist.4 -
Divinius✭✭✭✭✭
✭Oh, I forgot to address this:Second, you come here telling me that those polls are invalid because "reasons" yet you claim ALL of the players that voted no would somehow instantly quit because they cannot Flee without being flagged for PvP.
Talk about double standards.
I'm not making this stuff up. Have you read any of the other billion threads on the topic? There's lots of people that have said they would indeed flat-out quit if PvP Justice ever happened. On the other hand, I don't think I've ever seen anyone say, "I'm quitting because they didn't implement PvP justice."
You want to test my theory? Make a new poll. Make the options as follows:
PvP Justice System?
1) I think PvP Justice is awesome, and should be put into the game, and if it's not here in the next 3 months, I'm going to quit playing ESO entirely.
2) I think PvP Justice is awesome, and should be put into the game, but I will still play even if they don't do it.
3) I don't care either way.
4) I hate the idea of PvP Justice, but if they implemented it, I would just deal with it.
5) I hate the idea of PvP Justice, and if they implemented it without a real opt-out, I would likely quit playing ESO entirely.
I would be willing to bet that (unless PvP people start trolling the poll to be jerks) the majority will pick option 2, but you'll get far more people choosing the last option than the first one. Even WITH the heavily-biased forum-goers being mostly PvP people.1 -
Amsel_McKay✭✭✭✭✭First of all, people could still participate in the Justice System, and all it has to offer currently without ever actually fighting another player.
All they have to do is not choose the "Flee" option.
Playing this way would ensure they never PvP, yet it would add some dimension to thieving and killing because getting a bounty means you would have to avoid real players, with minds of their own, not some NPC with a standard route you can avoid.
Honestly, I wouldn't even care if they implemented everything you suggested, as long as there is a REAL opt-out option that would allow me to never have to worry about any PvP aspect. So long as there's a game setting that would allow me to do everything I can now, and not ever get myself flagged for PvP, you can have your PvP Justice system. I just want to be able to choose to pretend it doesn't exist.
The problem I have is I know they will have the best gear, abilities and guild lines that would require me to go PvP to get them, and the achievements...
0 -
CromulentForumID✭✭✭✭Actually, you don't. You have not read my detailed concept, if you had, you would have noticed there are a lot of rules into place to prevent exactly that what you are describing.
What you are opposing is your own vision of how you think it would be implemented.
For your information, to clarify (so you don't have to read):
Players have a way to prevent accidental PvP tagging: "prevent attacking innocents". It is already partially implemented in the game - you cannot cast Rapid Manouvers while near an NPC if you have that option on. The same would apply with all buffs and heals. Those that don't have that option turned on are in risk of "accidentally" helping a criminal, which is a felony. It would not instantly make you flagged for PvP, but you would get a bounty.
I am not sure it is all there, to tell you the truth. You have a lot there, but it certainly is not everything. There are still questions to be answered. You are pretty quick to assume you have it all covered and everyone who objects is just missing the point.
The example of Rapid Maneuvers (RM). The power is prevented from being used when you press the button. It does not cast.
Are you suggesting that all powers that can affect another player are disabled when an NPC is within your target range, just like RM? When does that get shut off? How does the game know you are now in an area where the powers should be allowed? Do I need to toggle it when I am questing or in a dungeon so I know my powers will work if NPCs are around? What if I specifically like the option on so I can never accidentally kill an NPC while tossing powers around in combat? Do I have to now choose and play completely differently than I do now to accommodate this area of the Justice System?
Do you mean the power is disabled when within the target range of someone flagged for PVP? What if I want to help a team member? How do I get flagged so my powers affect them without also committing a crime and waiting for a guard to come by? Toggle off the option? Am I automatically flagged if I team with someone? If I have to toggle, chances are it'll be too late to help, especially if I need to navigate console menus to change the option.
Do you mean that the option to not attack innocents will be an additional power check for when the power is executed? So, now, ESO needs to reprogram all powers that affect other players to also check your option, then how the other player is flagged?
It's quite possible that you did answer some of the questions I posed. If you did, I am sorry for missing them. It's easy to miss some things within long, multiple posts. My questions are also not an exhaustive list. I do not think it's important to my point in the end, though. I am mainly arguing against your somewhat dismissive tone to those who object and your seeming belief that you've covered it all. You didn't.
It's extremely possible that ESO would miss something during their implementation. Depending on what they missed, it could certainly cost them players. On consoles patching those holes could take a long time, or at least cost a lot as they need to pay for more frequent patch certifications. Given all of the challenges and the potential costs, I just cannot see how it would be worth it for them to pursue this system.1 -
BenLocoDete✭✭✭Previous quotesIn my opinion, the choice to be an Enforcer or an Outlaw should be a long-term choice, with one excluding the other. Just like being a Vampire or Werewolf.Clerics1985 wrote: »TL;DR
I got to about the second Post. I think it's pretty detailed and I like the thought process, here's where you hit a Wall on my end. You state that "enforcers" are Not allowed to take part in DB/TG DLC. * why would they force this if they wouldn't force alliance/faction lock-in. For it to work you are going to have to find a Way to Appease The masses, meaning you can't Pull 2 DLCs off a players Base game just because they "opt" into a "enforcer" roll there's got to be better way around this?
(...)
As for "leaving PvP in PvP areas":
I believe the current Justice System is very lacking in terms of excitement and risk/reward.
The repeatable quests from TG and DB do not provide enough incentive to be played for an extensive period of time, making the Dark Brotherhood DLC have very short life-span.
Choices are pointless anyway as more elements of Roleplay are trivialized - change your gender, race, class, and soon change your alliance at any point for $$$$ in the crown store. I wouldn't be surprised with a God Mode exclusive to ESO+ members coming.
What downs any RPG is the lack of challenge, reward and consequences - and ESO is loose on a downward spiral and will be forgotten in a minute, once a regular RPG attempt is out.
Your character can be a hero one day, murder cows the next, go jerk in the war, save a king, help the daedra and finally defeat Molag Bal, to go back and collect books like no one cares... nothing matters in Tamriel.
The justice system is horrible and clearly incomplete as it only makes crime enjoyable. At times you're roleplaying a good character and it is frustrating to see all the exploits happening around without being able to do anything. The worst part is to see people advocating to leave it as it is as if it was any good, to begin with.
ZOS should not have, ever, split PvP and PvE. All it did was create an internal rivalry among the community where none knows what the other is, but if is pro-Justice System then must be an evil PvPer just waiting to gank other people and has no point in life other than ruining everyone's experience. This is absurd and ZOS should have avoided this type of segregation at all costs, regardless of this, Cyrodiil is not a feature, is a flaw and I should mention it is falsely advertised: "hundreds of people fighting in huge battles" oh shut up.Edited by BenLocoDete on July 8, 2016 8:55PM[slit]Throat[/slit]2 -
I'm one of those people who would absolutely hate to have the PvP Justice system implemented. I wouldn't quit ESO, but I'd be highly frustrated that a segment of the game I'm finding highly enjoyable right now thanks to the recent DLCs would be seriously nerfed by my need to avoid the PvP griefers who would be lurking around in towns to kill anyone who happens to trigger the PvP flag. I don't do PvP -- I'm absolutely terrible at it, and would stand no chance. (And I "Flee" all the time -- it's a matter of honor that I should never pay a bounty to a Guard...)
What you're suggesting ONLY has benefit to the PvP players -- it has NO benefit to PvE players AT ALL. It's just a meaningless hurdle for PvE players, and not a very fun one. ("If I flee from the guards, maybe I can get away," a potentially exciting chase scene, becomes a boring "If I flee from the guards, I'll just be ganked by a dozen annoying PvPers, so why do I even bother playing?")
If you *really* want to have PvP Justice, the only real way to do it is to have a completely separate and isolated instance of the servers for people who want to do PvP Justice. If you want to do PvP Justice, you'd have to be in that instance. Heck - you could then have PvP anywhere in Tamriel, and those of us who don't want to deal with the PvP stuff don't have to see it or know it's happening. SWTOR recently changed how they handle PvP to follow this scheme - every server there now has PvP and PvE instances, and you select which one you want. It's made PvE in that game a LOT more fun, because we no longer have to worry about the annoying PvPers bothering us anymore.
Which is, IMHO, the most likely reason PvP players are into this idea -- the idea of being able to gank PvE players must make them feel like a kid in a candy store. I wonder how many PvPers would still be as strongly supportive of a PvP Justice system if they knew NONE the PvE players wouldn't be involved... And I wonder how many of the people who support PvP Justice identify as PvE players -- I'm guessing it's a tiny percentage if any all all.9 -
Divinius✭✭✭✭✭
✭stevenbennett_ESO wrote: »I'm one of those people who would absolutely hate to have the PvP Justice system implemented. I wouldn't quit ESO, but I'd be highly frustrated that a segment of the game I'm finding highly enjoyable right now thanks to the recent DLCs would be seriously nerfed by my need to avoid the PvP griefers who would be lurking around in towns to kill anyone who happens to trigger the PvP flag. I don't do PvP -- I'm absolutely terrible at it, and would stand no chance. (And I "Flee" all the time -- it's a matter of honor that I should never pay a bounty to a Guard...)
What you're suggesting ONLY has benefit to the PvP players -- it has NO benefit to PvE players AT ALL. It's just a meaningless hurdle for PvE players, and not a very fun one. ("If I flee from the guards, maybe I can get away," a potentially exciting chase scene, becomes a boring "If I flee from the guards, I'll just be ganked by a dozen annoying PvPers, so why do I even bother playing?")
If you *really* want to have PvP Justice, the only real way to do it is to have a completely separate and isolated instance of the servers for people who want to do PvP Justice. If you want to do PvP Justice, you'd have to be in that instance. Heck - you could then have PvP anywhere in Tamriel, and those of us who don't want to deal with the PvP stuff don't have to see it or know it's happening. SWTOR recently changed how they handle PvP to follow this scheme - every server there now has PvP and PvE instances, and you select which one you want. It's made PvE in that game a LOT more fun, because we no longer have to worry about the annoying PvPers bothering us anymore.
Which is, IMHO, the most likely reason PvP players are into this idea -- the idea of being able to gank PvE players must make them feel like a kid in a candy store. I wonder how many PvPers would still be as strongly supportive of a PvP Justice system if they knew NONE the PvE players wouldn't be involved... And I wonder how many of the people who support PvP Justice identify as PvE players -- I'm guessing it's a tiny percentage if any all all.
I wish I could give you both an Agree and an Awesome...3 -
FleetwoodSmack✭✭✭✭✭
✭stevenbennett_ESO wrote: »I'm one of those people who would absolutely hate to have the PvP Justice system implemented. I wouldn't quit ESO, but I'd be highly frustrated that a segment of the game I'm finding highly enjoyable right now thanks to the recent DLCs would be seriously nerfed by my need to avoid the PvP griefers who would be lurking around in towns to kill anyone who happens to trigger the PvP flag. I don't do PvP -- I'm absolutely terrible at it, and would stand no chance. (And I "Flee" all the time -- it's a matter of honor that I should never pay a bounty to a Guard...)
What you're suggesting ONLY has benefit to the PvP players -- it has NO benefit to PvE players AT ALL. It's just a meaningless hurdle for PvE players, and not a very fun one. ("If I flee from the guards, maybe I can get away," a potentially exciting chase scene, becomes a boring "If I flee from the guards, I'll just be ganked by a dozen annoying PvPers, so why do I even bother playing?")
If you *really* want to have PvP Justice, the only real way to do it is to have a completely separate and isolated instance of the servers for people who want to do PvP Justice. If you want to do PvP Justice, you'd have to be in that instance. Heck - you could then have PvP anywhere in Tamriel, and those of us who don't want to deal with the PvP stuff don't have to see it or know it's happening. SWTOR recently changed how they handle PvP to follow this scheme - every server there now has PvP and PvE instances, and you select which one you want. It's made PvE in that game a LOT more fun, because we no longer have to worry about the annoying PvPers bothering us anymore.
Which is, IMHO, the most likely reason PvP players are into this idea -- the idea of being able to gank PvE players must make them feel like a kid in a candy store. I wonder how many PvPers would still be as strongly supportive of a PvP Justice system if they knew NONE the PvE players wouldn't be involved... And I wonder how many of the people who support PvP Justice identify as PvE players -- I'm guessing it's a tiny percentage if any all all.
I wish I could give you both an Agree and an Awesome...
Used one of mine. They pretty much nailed it. Not to mention the fact that choosing flee for an accidental bounty, and then being flagged for PvP when you're no where near ready to PvP is just completely ridiculous. The reasons why I think it's ridiculous are blatantly obvious in this thread.Tell me lies, tell me sweet little lies!1 -
Milvan✭✭✭✭✭
✭Well, you don't actually need to elaborate that much. Back in the 90's, Ultima online had the best justice system ever. If you kill more than 2 people you become a PK (red named), if you atack some or tried to pickpocket him you become criminal (gray name). On both cases you would be attacked on sight by guards and players. Some shards (servers xD) even had prison in order to the players pay for the "kills" with griding and gathering xD. It was pretty fun back in the day, but I'm not really sure if this would work on ESO, also becasuse you would need a open world pvp.
Ah, and, of course, just a little bit of nostalgia here: GUARDS“Kings of the land and the sky we are; proud gryphons.” Stalker stands, the epitome of pride. Naked and muscular, his wings widen and his feet dig in as if he alone holds down the earth and supports the heavens, keeping the two ever separate.”
Gryphons guild - @Milvan,2 -
Xylphan✭✭✭✭A PvP justice system with rewards would turn into legitimized thuggery and be exploited to no end. Just normal PvP play is already exploited on a regular basis. There's reasons why we don't have privatized police in the real world, and the results would be even worse in a virtual world where there's no repercussions for being a sociopathic ********.
ZOS figured this out pretty damn quick and made the right call.6 -
BenLocoDete✭✭✭IndyWendieGo wrote: »Previous Quotesstevenbennett_ESO wrote: »I'm one of those people who would absolutely hate to have the PvP Justice system implemented. I wouldn't quit ESO, but I'd be highly frustrated that a segment of the game I'm finding highly enjoyable right now thanks to the recent DLCs would be seriously nerfed by my need to avoid the PvP griefers who would be lurking around in towns to kill anyone who happens to trigger the PvP flag. I don't do PvP -- I'm absolutely terrible at it, and would stand no chance. (And I "Flee" all the time -- it's a matter of honor that I should never pay a bounty to a Guard...)
What you're suggesting ONLY has benefit to the PvP players -- it has NO benefit to PvE players AT ALL. It's just a meaningless hurdle for PvE players, and not a very fun one. ("If I flee from the guards, maybe I can get away," a potentially exciting chase scene, becomes a boring "If I flee from the guards, I'll just be ganked by a dozen annoying PvPers, so why do I even bother playing?")
If you *really* want to have PvP Justice, the only real way to do it is to have a completely separate and isolated instance of the servers for people who want to do PvP Justice. If you want to do PvP Justice, you'd have to be in that instance. Heck - you could then have PvP anywhere in Tamriel, and those of us who don't want to deal with the PvP stuff don't have to see it or know it's happening. SWTOR recently changed how they handle PvP to follow this scheme - every server there now has PvP and PvE instances, and you select which one you want. It's made PvE in that game a LOT more fun, because we no longer have to worry about the annoying PvPers bothering us anymore.
Which is, IMHO, the most likely reason PvP players are into this idea -- the idea of being able to gank PvE players must make them feel like a kid in a candy store. I wonder how many PvPers would still be as strongly supportive of a PvP Justice system if they knew NONE the PvE players wouldn't be involved... And I wonder how many of the people who support PvP Justice identify as PvE players -- I'm guessing it's a tiny percentage if any all all.
I wish I could give you both an Agree and an Awesome...
Used one of mine. They pretty much nailed it. Not to mention the fact that choosing flee for an accidental bounty, and then being flagged for PvP when you're no where near ready to PvP is just completely ridiculous. The reasons why I think it's ridiculous are blatantly obvious in this thread.
By the Aedra you instantly respawn what's the matter? And it would actually be funny like accidentally stealing a cuirass from the market, and suddenly 15 instant gap closers and ambushes obliterating your character from life. You won't accidentally steal ever again, will you?
Just kidding, but yes instant atomic wars in the market are somewhat expected, the good thing would be having some allies fighting alongside you, why everyone committing crimes feel like they will be ganked alone? Outlaws are the majority of players, I doubt anyone would enforce anything without having to suddenly pick a fight with a whole gang. Just imagine a market revolt where one enforcer approaches a young burglar, and then everybody around with some bounty on their head jumps in to resist the law, some guards join the fight and in the midst of hell broke loose an opportunist empties the caches silently.
All of this sounds incredibly funny to me.[slit]Throat[/slit]1
This discussion has been closed.