I don't think they should be fair and I don't think they can be, by the definition of fair you're using.Originally posted by Baxie
Taken from the AO Newsletter:
"Anarchy Online Shadowlands
The expansion pack, Shadowlands, will encompass several new playfields, the floating city of Jobe, profession specialisation, new variations of the breeds, upgrades to items, and many surprises. Go to the Anarchy Online website to read the entire press release."
And you still think a PvP fight between a Non Expansion Char and an Expansion char is fair?
I'll give you an example. If I want to taketime to explore and to roleplay casually, to help other players, to participate in group activities that don't really benefit me, and so on, I have to make choices. I have to choose between giving up some of those things, playing for longer each day than I already do, or neglecting certain things.
In short, I am broke, my armor sucks, and I have neglected my implants. How is it then that I can find myself in a "fair" fight with another player my level?
I may find another player whose character is a weakling, one who is lower level than me, or what have you, but an even match still won't often be fair because we stand to take away from it different degrees of notoriety and satisfaction.
This is not a complaint, mind you; it is a defense of the system and a denial of the importance of fairness in this game. AO permits players to avoid combat with other players if they are careful. Should you find yourself in a pvp fight, it is in large part going to be a fight between care and planning which took place before the fight occurred.
If want a battle of skill, I'll play a game like Quake II or Subspace in which moment to moment knowledge my surroundings, my opponent's physical movement, and the comparative strengths of the available weapons within a given situation are all vital elements which provide for a deep contest. If I want a chance to be cunning and to benefit from comprehending a broad situation I can't entirely see, I might play a strategy game or a more thoughtful action game such as Tribes or Allegiance.
Nine times out of ten you're not going to win a fight because of skill or cunning in AO, or even luck. Unless you are fully specialized for combat and you can know your opponent is also (only possible in a league situation or a fight between friends, to both of which the complaint you voiced above can't apply), pvp on RK is necessarily going to be a contest focused on planning and preparation - time and effort equipping yourself and wisdom exercised in picking your battles.
With all due respect to you I think you're asking that the game continue to live by a principle which it doesn't live by today or even attempt to live by.
I was disheartened to read the original news promising "a" new city, and moreso now in a way. Unless we're to be quite charitable indeed with our definition of "surprises", it seems to me that much work is being done and will be done on playfields leading neither to Jobe nor to Sparta nor from the Newland Desert to the Wailing Wastes.Originally posted by Baxie
The problem as we see it is: Make an Expansion with half of the playfields that makes the world of Rubi Ka. Perks and new items that will give you an Edge, new Bots/Planes/Cars, whatever.
The point is that you got a choice when this Expansion pack arrives: Buy it or don't! Noone forces you to. Well If I want to see what is on that map that came with the game I already paid for. If I wanna go see the Fame City of Jobe, which I spent three days scouring Rubi Ka to find coz it was rumored to be in the oceans south of Rome. Or maybe in the North Western wastelands. Three days, in a month which I already paid for.
It is fine to have closed playfields, but we have a great many of them, some of them important to Rubi-Ka's history, many of them visible on the map which came in the box, most of them named in maps within a strategy guide endorsed by Funcom and described in detail on the official website long ago. I have maps for five of them installed in my HUD and a sixth waiting in a backpack.
It is a very specious argument indeed that some people have attempted to construct, claiming Funcom never promised to open these playfields, all such games have them, we just need to be patient, etc. Not to put down the existing ones - they are very nice for the most part or I wouldn't care about gaining access to more of them - but I think the notion that they're missing for any reason other than necessity and scaling back of priorities is obliterated by fact that there's no logic behind their layout, and the fact that there has been and remains a glaring absence of care and attention in the alignment of those that exist now.
The expansion seems like the nail in that coffin, because from all appearances unless Funcom intends to add a new playfield every ten days between now and their expansion's release date, we're getting something else instead.
who's major?
