Page 6 of 11 FirstFirst 1234567891011 LastLast
Results 101 to 120 of 212

Thread: The Role of the Neutrals

  1. #101

    Angry hmmm

    who cares - I dont even play anymore cause there is nothing to do in the game other than broken shores missions

  2. #102

    Smile Nice to be noticed!

    I ,for one, would very much see the Neut. "side" as the best possibility to really roleplay, and I would work for both sides if the pay is right, and I can live with it. Should this conflict end in one final battle I would really like to see Neuts. on both sides.

    Snooper.
    Fixer.

  3. #103

    Nuetrals, Why be Nuetral?

    I dont get it? Why are Nuetrals attacked on site by NPC's in Clan and Omni Areas? this is ludicrous! I mean lets look at it from the view point most take when it comes to nuetrality politically.

    First off nuetral is supposed to be exactly as the name imply's, Not on eithers side. We there for as nuetrals distance ourselves from a war that we disagree with for one point or another. In history Nuetrality is generally respected.

    Its for this reason I think that funcom needs to reevaluate Nuets being attacked by OMNI and Clan. I think they need to instigate a system like EQ where whether or not a player is attacked by an opposing side is determined by how much they've done to aggrivate the other side. Not automatically assumed by some Funcom programmer that hey these guys are nuetral so they must expect to be attacked by every tom dick and suzan. No most take the stance of nuetrality as a way of getting out of the conflict not thrust into it. Its lame that you would make us be forced into such a circumstance.

    Another thing is when are we on RK2 going to get a story line? I play almost 12 hours a day and I have never seen anything remotely resembling an event happening on RK2. We have no storyline and we on the server laughingly aknowledge this. So on our server it doesnt really matter whether or not we are neutral or not.

    But overall I think the days where neutrals were exempt from being mauled by everybody was better. I mean its bad enough what you did to us in PVP, why screw us with PVM. I think thats how the majority of Nuets feel screwed. Look what was done to Newland? The Bullys at Majestic Bridge? The Oasis in Newland? Every decent hunting spot we ever had has been nerfed. Does Funcom realize that its changes like this that cause players to quit playing the game? If you continually nerf spawns, classes your going to piss people off and alienate them. I have never seen in any other games this behavior become so predominent. I have lost more friends in this game to people quiting thand I did in any other game that I've played. Its sad really cuase theres alot of potential here but if you strip social elements out of the game then you're going to strip players of what they enjoy all sides included. In essence Stop nerfing spawns cause players have found them enjoyable to hunt. This doesnt stagnate the game making it impossible to level makes the game old so fast.

    Ok I am done now. But take to heart what I've wrote.

  4. #104

    Re: Just a little reply to Rayfield

    Originally posted by Mürten La Suée
    I completely understand your "if you're not with us you're against us" point of view but I don't think it would be fair to generalize it. Let me explain : if your character is an Omni/Clan extremist then I agree he'd shoot at a Neut without asking questions. But what about NPC civilians? Why shopkeepers would turn down money? It's logic for a clan shopkeeper not to sell anything to an Omni character because he would help the other side that way. If he sells something to a neut who doesn't want to support any side he won't help his enemies but he sure would make his business run better (which would profit his faction in a way).
    For the 'tab' problem I don't agree with you. It may not be a bug but I think it isn't fair right now (of course if the storyline takes another path then....everything's possible). If you want your character to be a neut-killer then it's your own choice and you can target anybody you want (hell, you can even target Ross being an Omni, it's your life) but I don't think it should be a 'default setting' that neuts are seen as foes by both factions.
    But I'm not complaining, it's just my little own opinion .
    Problem is, how this game has set our characters. are we just regular day joes? no, we are put here to make a difference, for which ever side you're on. and from the beginning, there is only 2 sides. clan and omni. those who are neither are automatically viewed as that. neither <--not a 'good' neither. =)

    i don't disagree the neutrals can be parts like a 3rd party gruild with only the intent of aid....(Red Cross?, Salvation Army?, UNICEF?), or they maybe just profiteers in the war, making money off both sides, or even those who fan the flames, hoping that both sides shall fail, and they can reap from the dead.

    but one thing. there are two factions fighting here. and the spots for neutral shopkeepers and other civilians seem to be all taken by NPCs and what not. so do you think FC made this game so u can be a simple civilian of this planet? why do you think u have guns and armor? cuz u're a neutral farmer and the rhinomen are bashing down your crops? lol.....excuses are excuses....wanting to have even odds, JOIN A SIDE.
    Blue Steel(TM)

    E 86% - S 60% - A 33% - K 20%
    http://www.andreasen.org/bartle/

    SL upgraded oct 10, 2003

    RK2 - Derek"Rayfield" Zoolander
    RK2 - "Umeshiso" Maki
    RK2 - Sylvester "Code187" Vallone

  5. #105

    Re: Nuetrals, Why be Nuetral?

    Originally posted by Psikat
    Its for this reason I think that funcom needs to reevaluate Nuets being attacked by OMNI and Clan. I think they need to instigate a system like EQ where whether or not a player is attacked by an opposing side is determined by how much they've done to aggrivate the other side. Not automatically assumed by some Funcom programmer that hey these guys are nuetral so they must expect to be attacked by every tom dick and suzan. No most take the stance of nuetrality as a way of getting out of the conflict not thrust into it. Its lame that you would make us be forced into such a circumstance.
    "make you be forced into such a circumstance." you chose to be neutral fully KNOWING these circumstances, so if you picked neutrality, you face the consequences of your choice. damn neutrals and their excuses.

    dude...and the only way to role play for RK2 are on the boards....cuz we ain't getting any lovin'.
    Blue Steel(TM)

    E 86% - S 60% - A 33% - K 20%
    http://www.andreasen.org/bartle/

    SL upgraded oct 10, 2003

    RK2 - Derek"Rayfield" Zoolander
    RK2 - "Umeshiso" Maki
    RK2 - Sylvester "Code187" Vallone

  6. #106

    Exclamation Rhinoman!

    In response to Psikat's posting: Rhinomen have a well-developed hunter-gatherer society. They have a matriarchal system of leadership and spiritual guidance by the shamanisitic mystiques. They also have a well-disciplined military class.

    And! They are relatively peaceful. I have never seen them raise a hand against a farmer or his/her field without provocation. Actually, they seem rather neutral! Maybe we better set the OT and clan NPCs to attack them on sight as well.

    Be nice to the Rhinomen! They are noble creatures!

  7. #107
    Everyone makes mistakes in his life and why shouldn´t someone be able to switch to neutral because he/she/it is tired of all this stupid conflict? Just because some people are complaining and showing some kind of elitist attitude? I have respect for everyone who made it into the high levels as a neutral but please show that you are mature enough to accept the decision of other people out there.

    If someone admits that he has chosen the wrong side why to blame him that he acknowledges his sins? Last thing I would ever to is to laugh at him because there isn´t something more stupid than this.

    - Pangur (lvl 87 adv, clan)

  8. #108

    Re: Safety in Clan/Omni cities

    Originally posted by Bionitrous
    Desbet, this is one of the things you 'earn' as you stick to your Neutrality and level. Guards will never attack you unless they have been bugged into standard Monster behavior. It's actually worked out better than I thought.
    I read the thing, and tell you what, it makes alot of sense. I'm sticking to my guns and am going to stay neutral. The only thing that i've noticed though is that there are alot more reddish creatures wandering around in Trade. compaired to the once 'rare' sightning of a probe. since last patch at any rate.

    But hey, I like the sound of it. I'm here for the story and the Roleplaying aspect of AO. And my freinds, that is one mamoth aspect.

    That aside, I'm still going to gripe about the rest of that jazz. in the other post.

    Oh heh, and one last thing I didn't think to put in the other post. I want to be a part of the story. Not an observer as a lvl 12 omni agent watching the Dust Commandos lay waste to all the new blood; and the only help I can offer is a fling shot from a ql 20 gluegun for 2damage. I want to -be there- and -be a part of- the story. If that means that I need to be 'on call' for Funcom to say, hey you need to be here at this time and do this script... I'll do it. gladly.

    (secrets shared) I spent a good hour of my work day (mywork doesn't take much thought ) thinking about a cituation where some shady indavidual says to me, "go to meetmedere and kill Mr. rataman.(WOOT?)" But hey, I'm leading a booring life right now in AO. Wander the desert, take amission for Aegean and run like hell... Wander some more... I'm getting alot of sight see'n done heh.

  9. #109

    Happiness

    I am Neutral and I was returning from a mission deep in Varmint Woods and I was taking the west road to Tir. Here is what happened.

    Attacked by Commander Kelley Frederickson.
    Commander Kelley Frederickson hits you for 1609 cold damage.
    You have died.
    -1 level in experience.

    Do you let level 200 players start PvP with level 50 ones? No.
    Do you put aggressive level 200 monsters just outside a major city that shelters many low level players? No.

    Why do you not do this? Because it would make the completely defenseless victims miserable and the goal of a game company like Funcom, is to make playing FUN for the players.

    Today was a pretty miserable day, I can tell you that.

    Why exactly are high level sided NPCs running around in newbie areas massacring neutral characters as they wander by? I'd really appreciate a statement like, "Yes, that is the way we want it and it is staying that way." or "No, we will fix that ASAP because dying once a day and losing 3 hours of playtime is even more serious than gimping Martial Artist damage for months." Because then I would not waste any effort like I am now, trying to explain how frustrating this aspect of the game is for one (and probably many) of your paying customers.

    This is a serious problem. Treat it that way. And while you're at it, how about having the neutral cities decide that OT and Clan have massacred enough of their population. Make them start annihilating all OT and Clan that visit the neutral cities. Then at least the sheer volume of miserable and vocal players might get some attention.

    "Why is a NEUTRAL NPC attacking my little OT soldier?"

    Why, indeed.

  10. #110
    i'm still getting vibes that many ppl thing neutrals are their own side.

    they're not. get over it. if u get caught in a mousetrap ones and survive the experience, are you going to try and steal the cheese again? if so, deal with it. u chose neutral to not be a part of the conflict. well, this conflict happens to be surrounding your little neutral cities, and you guys make good target practice.

    okay...so that's a little over emphasizing that fact...but still. we're talking about a planet owned/leased whatever by Omni-Tek, and there's this bunch of revolutionaries trying to revolt against the Capitalist Dictatorship(read Fascist) government running the entire planet, and you guys are wanting that we treat u in the middle as something other than sitting ducks? not quite. this is role-playing. and i'm glad some ppl have found out that at higher lvs they get attacked way less by affiliated npcs.

    read the proposals further up from this post about how to make neutrals have more substance. we should have flags to be able to tell the real neutrals and the defected neutrals apart. if they have that, then i'll agree that ppl can forfeit their affiliation to become neutral. IC or OOC wise, this is a much better choice than just simply making a few neutral membership forms, because there simply shouldn't be any. same goes for being taken off the <tab>target list.....won't happen as long as you are not affiliated, punishment for not choosing a side, works perfectly in game.

    here's an idea tho....instead of neutral token boards being the same as omni or clan boards, they should also gain an extra advantage as they do more missions, etc.... say every board upgrade will allow the neutrals to be taken off target list from a higher titled NPC and PC.

    eg. neutral with a 30 token board will not be targetted by title 2 or below (lv 15 cannot tab target them)

    eg. neutral with a 60 token board will not be targetted by title 3 or below (lv 50 cannot tab target them)

    eg. neutral with a 120 token board will not be targetted by title 4 or below (lv 100 cannot tab target them)

    even if they are taken off tab target, they are still vulnerable as 'enemies' to all, but at least there will be a lot less accidental deaths, and it'll make neutrals work harder to get those boards!!



    btw, if you guys want to write something convincing, add something constructive to your posts.....ignorant, reasonless whines are boring to read, and logically, who do you think those seldomly seen employees of Funcom will listen to?
    Blue Steel(TM)

    E 86% - S 60% - A 33% - K 20%
    http://www.andreasen.org/bartle/

    SL upgraded oct 10, 2003

    RK2 - Derek"Rayfield" Zoolander
    RK2 - "Umeshiso" Maki
    RK2 - Sylvester "Code187" Vallone

  11. #111
    Pangur.....if you're tired of this conflict, get off the planet.

    Omni-Tek owns the planet. Clanners laid claims to parts of it to liberate it. Where do you think neutrals fit in? Retirees in Miami?

    exactly what i'm saying....little clanner not understanding what this planet is about. this is not earth. we are very far from anywhere where there are tens of hundreds of countries and many sides. this is a corporate-owned planet....(think...the mining colony planet from Aliens)

    hrm....how to put this in some way that's easier to understand for more ppl......think a territorial battle between 2 gangs with u standing in the middle with a gun in your hand. do you think either side will think you're just an innocent bystander? both side will probably take u down first, just to get rid of a "possibility" that you're not on their side. well, just so happens newland and borealis are living on some land each side wants to claim for their own advantage.
    Blue Steel(TM)

    E 86% - S 60% - A 33% - K 20%
    http://www.andreasen.org/bartle/

    SL upgraded oct 10, 2003

    RK2 - Derek"Rayfield" Zoolander
    RK2 - "Umeshiso" Maki
    RK2 - Sylvester "Code187" Vallone

  12. #112
    well said Rayfield
    /applause


    I don't think clanner access to Newland City should be restricted - read the Tir Accord, it says the Council Of Truth is responsible for the guarding/policing of Neutral Territory, that effectivly, makes it Clan territory.
    If Clan access is removed - so should all the guards, this would make Newland a free-for-all zone, nothing that any Neutral wants (since they would be hunted by Omni and Clans).
    I must warn you that I fight very dirty, I spit and fart and soil myself


    Me

    "Sings we a dances of Wolves
    Who smells fear and slays the coward

    Sings we a dances of Mans
    Who smells Gold and slays his brother"

  13. #113

    Break on through to the Neutral "side".

    Originally posted by Rayfield
    i'm still getting vibes that many ppl think neutrals are their own side. u chose neutral to not be a part of the conflict. well, this conflict happens to be surrounding your little neutral cities, and you guys make good target practice.
    Clearly, you cannot know the reason each person makes the choices that they do. I guess incorrectly on a regular basis, and so did you. I did not choose to be Neutral to avoid the conflict. I chose to be Neutral because I believe the elimination of either side would be detrimental to the future of Rubi-Ka. I work to see that balance is maintained between the two "sides".

    I agree that we are not a "side", but that is because we are in the middle. That does not mean that we are not a "faction" or are not "unified" in some sense. The fact that we are caught between two powerful forces means that we must be unified for simple survival.

    Are you a neutral? If you are not, you are not qualified to disagree with my stance on Neutral unity. I am a neutral and I can tell you that I encounter the unity of neutrals every day. Many neutrals help each other for no money. I give equipment to any Neutral that has a need. Others have done that for me. I will defend the life of a neutral if they are in need. Others have done that for me as well. One neutral saved my life when I was disconnected running through a PvP zone.

    And as far as my previous post, in a post just above this one, someone indicates that the Tir Accords give the clans the responsibility of maintaining the integrity of Neutral territory. Well, if that is so, it makes even less sense for clan military forces to be killing Neutral players. It is in the interest of both Omni-Tek and the clans that Neutral territory exist and remain Neutral. It provides a buffer between the two opposing sides and a buffer is vital to keeping control of volatile situations.

    Lucky for you, we do exist and want to be neutral. Even if we are screwed with so many game disadvantages.

    :-)

  14. #114
    I find myself reading this thread, and disagreeing with a whole lot.

    I play a neutral agent. While I do agree that everyone attacking us on sight is a little much, I do not see why we should not be attacked at all. We are not part of their side, and should not be trusted entirely.

    I also agree that not differentiating us from other non-x (insert your faction for x) individuals in PVP targeting is a mistake, I do think we should be targeted. Again, we are not on your side, and even if we are not the enemy, why should you trust us.

    I also think we should be able to strike in PVP. I personally see a wonderful opportunity to be available to the highest bidder (might just be an Opifex Agent attitude), regardless of what side of the conflict they are on. This is as much neutrality as not taking any part in the war, as I do not believe in or directly and exclusively work for either side. This also means that I should be capable of instigating combat!

    If I consider myself a mercenary, and work as such, I need to be able to perform this task.

    Simply put, do not treat us as the enemy, treat us instead as what we are...potential liabilities.
    Do not restrict the possibilities of gameplay by forcing us to take a peaceful neutral role, instead differentiate us from either side of the conflict so that we may play as we see fit, and have the most true Role Playing opportunity possible within the definition of what we are ... Neutral!

  15. #115
    Originally posted by Xed LRK
    well said Rayfield
    /applause


    I don't think clanner access to Newland City should be restricted - read the Tir Accord, it says the Council Of Truth is responsible for the guarding/policing of Neutral Territory, that effectivly, makes it Clan territory.
    If Clan access is removed - so should all the guards, this would make Newland a free-for-all zone, nothing that any Neutral wants (since they would be hunted by Omni and Clans).
    This is a Clan government telling persons not affiliated with the Clans, "Oh don't worry, we'll protect you!" without our consent.

    How is this different from Omni-Tek telling you that they are leasing the planet, and you are therefore on their land?

    It isn't any different. This is another reason to be neutral, in my opinion, as the Clan's "Council of Truth" is a government just like Omni-Tek. If I don't want to be opressed by Omni-Tek, why should I wish to be opressed by your council?

  16. #116

    Re: What about the Tir Accord?

    Originally posted by Aphelion
    I'd much rather see Funcom develop more important aspects of the game's content than concentrate on appeasing the complaints of Neutrals who knew what they were getting into when they decided to become Neutral.
    This is a statement I've seen repeatedly in a number of forums, but often times with Engie, Agent, Solitus, etc. inserted in place of Neutral.

    Really, Get off it!

    By that attitude, why should FunCom "Fix" anything - After all, you knew what you were getting into when you started.

    BTW, I agree fundamentally that Neutrals should not have it easy, should not have boards, etc. That is, second to the ability to RolePlay a Neutral more fully, a major reason I play neutral.

  17. #117
    Originally posted by Rayfield
    Pangur.....if you're tired of this conflict, get off the planet.

    Omni-Tek owns the planet.
    You remember the dinosaurs on Earth long time ago? They became extincted because they were unable to adapt to a new situation fast enough. You are showing the same egocentricity that was responsible for their fall. Earth' history is full of other examples, just in case you are not feeling strong family ties with a large saurian.

    BTW, what crossed your mind that I was talking about my person in this posting? Interesting how you try to twist my words, maybe you are a successful lawyer who does that all the time at court?

    - Pangur

  18. #118

    Smile

    Ok Rayfield, we get it, you don't like the Neutrals trying to be something different than a shooting practice to you (who's whining here?). But do you think it's the policy of every Omni/Clanner? Philip Ross offered an amnesty to the Clans (even if they are his arch-enemies) because that was something interesting to do in the storyline. If everyone should share your point of view there wouldn't be anything close to a storyline. That's one way to see things but then maybe we should call the game Armageddon Online and there wouldn't be a door labeled Neutrals in the character creation room, only Clans and Omnis (or Black and White, we don't care as long as we can blast our guns at each other....hhheheheh cool!!).
    If the Amnesty (which I bet you disagreed with) was offered by Omni-Tek to the Clans then why wouldn't Ross/CoT offer a real status to the Neutrals? Why can't things change? A lot of Neutrals who have posted on this thread are happy with the few changes proposed and they aren't that farfetched. Mostly token boards (like those for Clan and Omni) aren't requested by the Neutral community because that would sort of lower the value of the commitment made by staying neutral. By the way your proposal of other token boards that would make you disappear from the tab list of certain Omni and Clan is quite good (sincerely).
    So we aren't demanding a lot of things, and if we aren't on te tab list anymore doesn't mean you can't target us manually so you can keep your view about Neuts and attack them but it wouldn't be generalized as it is right now.

  19. #119

    Re: Re: What about the Tir Accord?

    Originally posted by Sraythe
    BTW, I agree fundamentally that Neutrals should not have it easy, should not have boards, etc. That is, second to the ability to RolePlay a Neutral more fully, a major reason I play neutral.
    absolutely.

  20. #120

    Thumbs up Neutral futures

    First, I'm glad that thought is being given to the neutral position. I'm a newbie, second week of play, and worried at some of the limitations apparently that currently become more evident later on i.e. access to the best tech, etcetera. I hope that the role for neutrals in a 2 sided conflict is clear - to act as 'lone wolves', mercenaries, spies, plausibly deniable agents for either side, diplomats, peacemakers... I'm sure a lot of more independant minded players like the idea of fence sitting too... There may be game mechanic issues I'm unaware of re the big narrative threads of the game development, but I'm happy to stay neutral if I can still get a good game experience, and I hope Funcom see their way clear to accomodating the third position!

Page 6 of 11 FirstFirst 1234567891011 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •