OFFICIAL NEWS

Removing the neutral button seems like it was done to prevent spies and more importantly neutral ammo crafters/carriers.

I sincerely doubt either battle party would want to chase rangers or other legitimately neutral homies around while they have rounds to win. Even if that were the case- walking into a war zone is dangerous. I don’t know what the effect of not choosing attack or defend will be, but it is probably negligible compared to a GM having to tp to all battles to remove neutral alts.....

Bonjour,

Désolée, je ne parlerai pas de bataille OP, ni de factions ...

À propos de l’île de guilde, notre chef de guilde nous a proposé de visiter des îles.
J'écris sur le wiki quelques notes (principalement sur ARK)

Je pense que je vais créer une page pour montrer plusieurs créations ... au cas où quelqu'un voudrait ajouter des lucios : p

À plus

Good idea Craftjenn ;)

Also i would like to see a way for Marauder to defend Marauder generals Pei, Sergio, Lixie and Aen.

I fail to see this "problem" as more than a storm in a cup.

Outpost battles take two hours from a day. Just. Two. Hours. (or one hour, in the future)

Most outposts are not placed at bottleneck points; there is always another path, going *around* said outpost. The only exceptions are Westgrove and Ginti, and even then .. you can go the long route unless both are under attack at the same time.

So, considering this, most regular players will NOT be inconvenienced by battles: they can find another time to trek around, they can take a detour around the outpost, or they can use power-ups to pass through untouched (even if forced to get tagged). Instead, alts and neutral ammo crafters are going to be inconvenienced. Cry me a river...

i really do not understand that you all seem to think it perfectly okay to assault a neutral player character, who has no intention of taking part in pvp (such as me) thus forcing pvp upon her/him instead of simply allowing that person the option to tp on out of there and not return duing tha battl activity there..

At all other times in all other places, a non-pvp interested player,cannot be pvp attacked without her/his consent. And should such a pvp assault nevertheless be somehow carried out, thatn that must have been via an exploit and thus against the rules here.

Truly, should a neutral player knowingly enter the area of the OP battle while it be ongoing, then I could agree that that player character in keeping with the rules could legitimately get attacked in pvp, especially since (i assume) a warning is given to leave or else.


But if said non-pvp interested player simply happen to be in a OP battle area when that battle ensues, why not simply let the poor sap (me for example) tp on out of there as quickly as the game mechanics make possible ??

You fear spying? Well then punish that such player as does spying, but leave poor little ole me out of your intrigues i plea!

There is to be no transitting such OP battle affected areas? Fair enough, then no transitting of them.. I am ok with that too.

But i plead in all earnest and heartpain for allowing a mere refugee of such a situation to flee for her/his life and limb and inventory safety via tp instead of having to choose a side. Do not force pvp on non-pvp interested persons please.

No one is stopping you from fleeing or forcing you to fight, you just are no longer allowed to sit in the middle of a temporary PVP area as 'neutral.'

That's not really true. The whole Lands of Umbra as well as Nexus are PvP, and if you want to go there you have no choice than to get pvp tagged. Same as on an OP during the actual attack phase.

So let's say you indeed are in such an area before the OP Battle starts. You will be informed AT LEAST 24 hours before that this Outpost is attacked and so you are in a "dangerous" zone. You decide to stay there? Then it's your own problem. And 24 hours is more than enough time to tp out.
Now what if you didn't see the warning for whatever weird reason? Ok you will be assigned to a random side. You might be killed ok. But then you can tp out to any place like you asked for. And you don't even get DP when killed by enemies on OP. So this is already with current mechanics true.

I am a bit taken aback by the apparent lack of sensibility for the plight of such a one as myself, who often is away from the game for considerable periods. Upon returning to the game i ofc land after login in that land and that location I was located in when i last left the game.

That can be potentially... well, just anywhere!

So there i lie, maybe right smack dab in the middle of some land where, as chance would have it, currently a OP battle had been enjoined!! 8/

Where i land upon login is not open to my free dispostion, not in the least! So then i, as one intending not to have anything to do with pvp nor with op battles find myself thrust into combo both gameplay modes.

What speaks against my being allowed to tp on out of there, after having been given notice of my plight, upon the ensueing whereof i have had no influence whatsoever??

I am not a spy nor do i ever intend to engage in spying. Give folks like me a break. Have all of your type of fun that you want and can within legitimate game mechanics and ingame legality, those of you, who so love pvp and / or OP battles.

But leave little ole me please out of that sort of activity, please.

Thank you for so patiently hearing me out on this issue. 8)

I personally don't tend to log off inside of OP's but, short of saying "just don't log off there" ....

I don't mind +1 on some safety-time to exit the zone if you walk into it, or log into it. Similar to other PVP zones.

This should satisfy some.

One narrow scenario should not be used as an example to cancel the proposed change altogether. Most people don't log off in the middle of outposts. Most people that do log off there, don't come back to a battle raging around them.

Oh, by the way, the client takes 30 seconds or more to fully load.. most people that log in during a war *currently*.. end up tagged anyway, because the timer to click "neutral" expires until the client is ready to display it.

Regarding the actual topic: Nice patch, Winchgate :) I for one appreciate all the changes brought by it.

Wow! That would be a super solution by my estimation

Thank you for showing that possibility to choose to either join the attack or to join the defense or to leave immediately per tp pact. Such a solution I would indeed very much welcome. 8)))

@Tryoamer, you still have the possibility to step back when you see the actual window popping up. When you are tagged PvP, you can still use your teleport pacts (and that is why usually people remove their PvP common tag when going to an OP battle).
If neutral + being attackable by both side (attackers + defenders) become the default (if implemented) I won't be against it. Sounds like a fair proposal.

But I'm already happy with the actual change :')