Forums » Suggestions
Forgive me, I'm wrong about you. You don't have any problems reading. You're just some arrogant fool who thinks a little too highly of himself for his own good.
This is an ONLINE game, and thus connecting and disconnecting are an inherent part of gameplay.
Bugs are also an inherent part of playing an online game; deliberately exploiting them with the intent to gain an advantage is cheating. Same thing with disconnecting intentionally because one wants a gameplay advantage...otherwise, one would use the game-provided method of logging off.
As an aside, the idea that there's any privacy interest in logging off is spurious. The active player list was removed because it was a source of alt discovery data, not because players have a privacy interest in all game-related actions. Unlike the APL, there's no broader information conveyed by a purely in-game "log-out initiated" indicator, so the same logic doesn't apply. Also unlike the APL, the indicator doesn't provide information unless you're in-game right in front of the subject. Anyone arguing against a log-out indicator by analogizing to the removal of the APL is either extremely stupid or extremely slimy.
Finally, the issue is most common with piracy but hardly limited to it. One can imagine any number of scenarios in which RP leads to a situation where one player may wish to give another player a chance to take action X instead of being killed. Not being able to determine whether that other player is playing the game or trying to excuse themselves (and their cargo) from it necessarily hinders all that gameplay.
I'm strongly against the idea of "trapping" people in game
People will not be trapped in-game; people would still be able to leave the keyboard anytime they chose, just like always. Their character, however, should not be able to tag along with them just to escape the realities of the in-game universe.
In sum, +1 OP. If someone has logged off or disconnected, the game should indicate that to others within visual range of the soon-to-be-OOG ship and persist the ship/cargo long enough to give a reasonable opportunity for other players to take action they would normally take had the player not decided to magically escape the game universe. For regular ships, that would be a pretty brief period of time; for capital ships, it would be significantly longer.
Bugs are also an inherent part of playing an online game; deliberately exploiting them with the intent to gain an advantage is cheating. Same thing with disconnecting intentionally because one wants a gameplay advantage...otherwise, one would use the game-provided method of logging off.
As an aside, the idea that there's any privacy interest in logging off is spurious. The active player list was removed because it was a source of alt discovery data, not because players have a privacy interest in all game-related actions. Unlike the APL, there's no broader information conveyed by a purely in-game "log-out initiated" indicator, so the same logic doesn't apply. Also unlike the APL, the indicator doesn't provide information unless you're in-game right in front of the subject. Anyone arguing against a log-out indicator by analogizing to the removal of the APL is either extremely stupid or extremely slimy.
Finally, the issue is most common with piracy but hardly limited to it. One can imagine any number of scenarios in which RP leads to a situation where one player may wish to give another player a chance to take action X instead of being killed. Not being able to determine whether that other player is playing the game or trying to excuse themselves (and their cargo) from it necessarily hinders all that gameplay.
I'm strongly against the idea of "trapping" people in game
People will not be trapped in-game; people would still be able to leave the keyboard anytime they chose, just like always. Their character, however, should not be able to tag along with them just to escape the realities of the in-game universe.
In sum, +1 OP. If someone has logged off or disconnected, the game should indicate that to others within visual range of the soon-to-be-OOG ship and persist the ship/cargo long enough to give a reasonable opportunity for other players to take action they would normally take had the player not decided to magically escape the game universe. For regular ships, that would be a pretty brief period of time; for capital ships, it would be significantly longer.
+1 to OP.
greenwall is just being deliberately obtuse. As usual.
greenwall is just being deliberately obtuse. As usual.
@Lecter
"The active player list was removed because it was a source of alt discovery data, not because players have a privacy interest in all game-related actions.
Sorry, you are wrong. Alt-finding was only one part of the APL removal. The other part was providing privacy to players' online status (unless you were buddies with them) -- with the intent to prevent people from specifically avoiding or specifically targeting those they see online.
One can imagine any number of scenarios in which RP leads to a situation where one player may wish to give another player a chance to take action X instead of being killed. Not being able to determine whether that other player is playing the game or trying to excuse themselves (and their cargo) from it necessarily hinders all that gameplay.
There are other, better ways to determine if someone is trying to avoid payment demands.
"Their character, however, should not be able to tag along with them just to escape the realities of the in-game universe."
The realities of the in-game universe include ones ability to log out (and in) whenever they so choose. You (and others) are trying to change that reality because you want to keep people from evading you in this fairly uncommon manner. There are already mechanisms in place to prevent people from immediately disappearing, as there should be. Taking them to the extreme and NEVER allowing people to log off if they are being pursued, or displaying the log out status to others in sector, is a way too big a give to a way too small amount of people.
"The active player list was removed because it was a source of alt discovery data, not because players have a privacy interest in all game-related actions.
Sorry, you are wrong. Alt-finding was only one part of the APL removal. The other part was providing privacy to players' online status (unless you were buddies with them) -- with the intent to prevent people from specifically avoiding or specifically targeting those they see online.
One can imagine any number of scenarios in which RP leads to a situation where one player may wish to give another player a chance to take action X instead of being killed. Not being able to determine whether that other player is playing the game or trying to excuse themselves (and their cargo) from it necessarily hinders all that gameplay.
There are other, better ways to determine if someone is trying to avoid payment demands.
"Their character, however, should not be able to tag along with them just to escape the realities of the in-game universe."
The realities of the in-game universe include ones ability to log out (and in) whenever they so choose. You (and others) are trying to change that reality because you want to keep people from evading you in this fairly uncommon manner. There are already mechanisms in place to prevent people from immediately disappearing, as there should be. Taking them to the extreme and NEVER allowing people to log off if they are being pursued, or displaying the log out status to others in sector, is a way too big a give to a way too small amount of people.
The other part was providing privacy to players' online status (unless you were buddies with them) -- with the intent to prevent people from specifically avoiding or specifically targeting those they see online.
Again, in no way is that issue relevant to a visual indicator available only to those who are already right next to your fucking ship. With the APL, the concern wasn't knowing who was/wasn't online - it was knowing who was/wasn't online without finding them in-game.
But your continued objection on this ground has at least cleared up whether it's stupidity or sliminess that motivates you.
The realities of the in-game universe include ones ability to log out (and in) whenever they so choose.
First, nobody is changing the ability to log out or otherwise disconnect from the game; the matter under discussion is what happens to the character after the player logs/disconnects, and whether an impending change in the character's existence in the game universe should be visually flagged for others interacting with that character. Do try to keep up.
Second, the ability to log out is not so absolutely free as you imply. Log out while moving or taking damage, and the log out aborts; disconnect from the internet/kill the client in the middle of a fight, and your character will continue to hang there in the game universe for a period of time. Again, the matter under discussion is whether that character persistence, beyond whatever whims the player may indulge about leaving the game, is sufficient...or needs beefing up to better balance other players' reasonable expectations about what they can expect to come from their play directed at another character.
I am waiting to hear any reasoned argument as to why one should not expect their ship and its contents to persist in-game for a while, along with an indication to other players in the area that the player behind that character is no longer available to interact with them, so that they can in turn decide what to do.
There are other, better ways to determine if someone is trying to avoid payment demands.
Payment demands are not the real issue here, merely one iteration where the issue crops up. Again, try to keep up.
displaying the log out status to others in sector, is a way too big a give to a way
Articulate a single legitimate interest a player has that is "given away" by indicating to those able to observe their character's ship that the player has initiated a log-off. Hint: 'because privacy' is not a response; that they're logged off will become public knowledge to those other players the moment they vanish from the sector anyway, so you're instead trying to defend keeping knowledge of the logging-off player's OOG intention from influencing the in-game actions of the other players, even though the logging-off player is using OOG actions to influence the in-game experience of those other players.
TL;DR - log off anytime you like, but don't expect the game help you deceive others who are already interacting with your character in the game, or to offer your character magic protection because of your OOG decision to depart.
Again, in no way is that issue relevant to a visual indicator available only to those who are already right next to your fucking ship. With the APL, the concern wasn't knowing who was/wasn't online - it was knowing who was/wasn't online without finding them in-game.
But your continued objection on this ground has at least cleared up whether it's stupidity or sliminess that motivates you.
The realities of the in-game universe include ones ability to log out (and in) whenever they so choose.
First, nobody is changing the ability to log out or otherwise disconnect from the game; the matter under discussion is what happens to the character after the player logs/disconnects, and whether an impending change in the character's existence in the game universe should be visually flagged for others interacting with that character. Do try to keep up.
Second, the ability to log out is not so absolutely free as you imply. Log out while moving or taking damage, and the log out aborts; disconnect from the internet/kill the client in the middle of a fight, and your character will continue to hang there in the game universe for a period of time. Again, the matter under discussion is whether that character persistence, beyond whatever whims the player may indulge about leaving the game, is sufficient...or needs beefing up to better balance other players' reasonable expectations about what they can expect to come from their play directed at another character.
I am waiting to hear any reasoned argument as to why one should not expect their ship and its contents to persist in-game for a while, along with an indication to other players in the area that the player behind that character is no longer available to interact with them, so that they can in turn decide what to do.
There are other, better ways to determine if someone is trying to avoid payment demands.
Payment demands are not the real issue here, merely one iteration where the issue crops up. Again, try to keep up.
displaying the log out status to others in sector, is a way too big a give to a way
Articulate a single legitimate interest a player has that is "given away" by indicating to those able to observe their character's ship that the player has initiated a log-off. Hint: 'because privacy' is not a response; that they're logged off will become public knowledge to those other players the moment they vanish from the sector anyway, so you're instead trying to defend keeping knowledge of the logging-off player's OOG intention from influencing the in-game actions of the other players, even though the logging-off player is using OOG actions to influence the in-game experience of those other players.
TL;DR - log off anytime you like, but don't expect the game help you deceive others who are already interacting with your character in the game, or to offer your character magic protection because of your OOG decision to depart.
Greenwall is the only person thus far to verbally oppose this idea. Any clue why he keeps insisting that he's representing the interest of the majority of VO?
Even a TGFT showed up to give the OP a +1 (Capt Fluffy), and that says a lot.
Even a TGFT showed up to give the OP a +1 (Capt Fluffy), and that says a lot.
With the APL, the concern wasn't knowing who was/wasn't online - it was knowing who was/wasn't online without finding them in-game.
It had to do with protecting the known online or offline status of individuals. Making known the intent of someone to change that status should also be protected, unless they choose to reveal it in chat. We do not have 'in sector' logging-on announcements, nor should we have 'in sector' logging-off announcements.
But your continued objection on this ground has at least cleared up whether it's stupidity or sliminess that motivates you.
unprovoked insult #1
First, nobody is changing the ability to log out or otherwise disconnect from the game;
Let me clarify, i meant the ability to log a character off and on without prior public notification.
the matter under discussion is what happens to the character after the player logs/disconnects, and whether an impending change in the character's existence in the game universe should be visually flagged for others interacting with that character.
No, the matters under discussion are: whether or not a character should initiate a log off without notifying nearby ships; and whether or not they should be able to log off at all under certain circumstances. This is not a discussion on persistence. Try to skim less and pay attention to the topic being discussed, otherwise kindly join joyless and his peanuts.
Again, the matter under discussion is whether that character persistence, beyond whatever whims the player may indulge about leaving the game, is sufficient..
Again, no it is not. Start a new thread if you want to discuss that.
I am waiting to hear any reasoned argument as to why one should not expect their ship and its contents to persist in-game for a while, along with an indication to other players in the area that the player behind that character is no longer available to interact with them, so that they can in turn decide what to do.
You can keep waiting on the persistence discussion. Indications of pending or existing client-server connection status should be hidden both for the above explained privacy reasons as well as the inability to distinguish between intentional and unintentional disconnects.
It had to do with protecting the known online or offline status of individuals. Making known the intent of someone to change that status should also be protected, unless they choose to reveal it in chat. We do not have 'in sector' logging-on announcements, nor should we have 'in sector' logging-off announcements.
But your continued objection on this ground has at least cleared up whether it's stupidity or sliminess that motivates you.
unprovoked insult #1
First, nobody is changing the ability to log out or otherwise disconnect from the game;
Let me clarify, i meant the ability to log a character off and on without prior public notification.
the matter under discussion is what happens to the character after the player logs/disconnects, and whether an impending change in the character's existence in the game universe should be visually flagged for others interacting with that character.
No, the matters under discussion are: whether or not a character should initiate a log off without notifying nearby ships; and whether or not they should be able to log off at all under certain circumstances. This is not a discussion on persistence. Try to skim less and pay attention to the topic being discussed, otherwise kindly join joyless and his peanuts.
Again, the matter under discussion is whether that character persistence, beyond whatever whims the player may indulge about leaving the game, is sufficient..
Again, no it is not. Start a new thread if you want to discuss that.
I am waiting to hear any reasoned argument as to why one should not expect their ship and its contents to persist in-game for a while, along with an indication to other players in the area that the player behind that character is no longer available to interact with them, so that they can in turn decide what to do.
You can keep waiting on the persistence discussion. Indications of pending or existing client-server connection status should be hidden both for the above explained privacy reasons as well as the inability to distinguish between intentional and unintentional disconnects.
Not sure it's worth dev time to implement it, and not sure i'd like to see more spammy shit on sector or on HUD.
my 2c:
logoff: just remove the ability to logoff when the speed of the ship is not zero. I remember you could logoff when traveling at constant speed without touching any controls, dont know if it still the case.
i usually poke my target with my ship to prevent it from login off, or shoot a blaster at it every 2-3s.
If the target cut off the connection, just take a book or something else while waiting fer him to log back, the proximity warning will tell ye there is a ship to shoot.
If the target is trying to force logoff by logging a second character on the same account, (i dont remember is there a fix for that, but i am pretty sure it has already been discussed).
The devs should delay the login and warn the player that he should properly logoff his previous character or if he cant wait ,a few minutes. The few minutes depending whether there are other ships in the 3k vicinity of his previous ship.
Or else force him log back with the same character he was previously logged on and exit properly the game or wait for the persistent timer on the previous character to elapse.
In any case, mentally note the name of the bugger, who escaped, and kill him on sight the next time.
my 2c:
logoff: just remove the ability to logoff when the speed of the ship is not zero. I remember you could logoff when traveling at constant speed without touching any controls, dont know if it still the case.
i usually poke my target with my ship to prevent it from login off, or shoot a blaster at it every 2-3s.
If the target cut off the connection, just take a book or something else while waiting fer him to log back, the proximity warning will tell ye there is a ship to shoot.
If the target is trying to force logoff by logging a second character on the same account, (i dont remember is there a fix for that, but i am pretty sure it has already been discussed).
The devs should delay the login and warn the player that he should properly logoff his previous character or if he cant wait ,a few minutes. The few minutes depending whether there are other ships in the 3k vicinity of his previous ship.
Or else force him log back with the same character he was previously logged on and exit properly the game or wait for the persistent timer on the previous character to elapse.
In any case, mentally note the name of the bugger, who escaped, and kill him on sight the next time.
the problem is that hitting them doesn't always cancel the logout, and while a fix for that makes it a bit better it still makes it way too easy to exploit the unfortunately necessary to include ability to log out at any time. We are asking for protection from exploitation. Actions (flying through grey in a moth XC) have consequences (getting shot by pirates). If you subvert the system to get around those consequences, that's an exploit. Removing exploitability seems like something the devs should take an interest in. Thus this thread.
Also, the "kill them next time" line is so stupid - why should I have to catch you twice to kill you?
Also, the "kill them next time" line is so stupid - why should I have to catch you twice to kill you?
Making known the intent of someone to change that status should also be protected, unless they choose to reveal it in chat...because? The negatives of not revealing that have already been made clear, so what's the legitimate interest in keeping it private?
We do not have 'in sector' logging-on announcements, nor should we have 'in sector' logging-off announcements.
A "X is about to appear here!" indicator is not needed to solve any problems created by an OOG decision to magically escape from in-game interactions. Indeed, it would provide an IG advantage to players who had not been interacting with the logging-in player previously. Lots of bad effects from having it, and no good reason it's needed.
A "X is about to disappear here!" indicator is basically the opposite in every way. It is needed to prevent a player's OOG decision from providing their character with an in-game advantage against other players they're already interacting with. No bad effects (that you've managed to name, anyway) from indicating this, and it solves the problem nicely of how other players should react to someone whose reaction to IG events is to pull their character out of the game.
If someone announced over sector chat FUCK YOU ALL, I'M TAKING MY BALL AND GOING HOME!, other players could respond as they saw fit. Logging off or disconnecting when interacting with other players is announcing to the game itself that's what you've chosen to do - the game should notify others who are interacting with your character and give them time to respond in a way that preserves in-game continuity. While better than nothing, it should not be necessary to continually shoot a character just to be sure the interaction will continue as dictated by the current state of play.
inability to distinguish between intentional and unintentional disconnects
Doesn't matter. If you suffer an unintentional disconnect, there's no reason your misfortune should be transferred to other players interacting with your character. The outcome should be the same: game notifies others in the immediate vicinity that your character will be gone in a reasonable period of time, and then persist your character for interaction for that period of time.
We do not have 'in sector' logging-on announcements, nor should we have 'in sector' logging-off announcements.
A "X is about to appear here!" indicator is not needed to solve any problems created by an OOG decision to magically escape from in-game interactions. Indeed, it would provide an IG advantage to players who had not been interacting with the logging-in player previously. Lots of bad effects from having it, and no good reason it's needed.
A "X is about to disappear here!" indicator is basically the opposite in every way. It is needed to prevent a player's OOG decision from providing their character with an in-game advantage against other players they're already interacting with. No bad effects (that you've managed to name, anyway) from indicating this, and it solves the problem nicely of how other players should react to someone whose reaction to IG events is to pull their character out of the game.
If someone announced over sector chat FUCK YOU ALL, I'M TAKING MY BALL AND GOING HOME!, other players could respond as they saw fit. Logging off or disconnecting when interacting with other players is announcing to the game itself that's what you've chosen to do - the game should notify others who are interacting with your character and give them time to respond in a way that preserves in-game continuity. While better than nothing, it should not be necessary to continually shoot a character just to be sure the interaction will continue as dictated by the current state of play.
inability to distinguish between intentional and unintentional disconnects
Doesn't matter. If you suffer an unintentional disconnect, there's no reason your misfortune should be transferred to other players interacting with your character. The outcome should be the same: game notifies others in the immediate vicinity that your character will be gone in a reasonable period of time, and then persist your character for interaction for that period of time.
I would like to clarify, for Greenwall, that people exploiting the logoff feature doesn't really bother me that much. I mean, it does a little. It IS immersion breaking, but usually I do what Cptn Blood suggests and just camp that spot till they log back in. I've even gone as far as dual boxing in the past, so I can continue to play on another account while waiting for the SOB to log back in.
I do however think this suggestion has merit, and is a way better idea than just adding a new dialogue that can be abused. Stopping players using /logoff while a PC is within 5000m would be preferable to me, but that has been discussed and dismissed in the past. Adding a simple notification that the target is about to vanish is not a game breaking deal, in my honest opinion. A target could still take the gamble and try to evade you by login out, if they think they have the time to survive the 10 seconds it takes. They could also try run to empty, and then initiate a /logoff while you try to chase them. This would NOT STOP people from leaving the game, it would not even stop people trying to log out to evade/cheat death. It would just enable players to make an informed decision on weather to open fire and try wax that sucker or not.
I would personally prefer if this notification was only sent to the person who has you targeted, and not spam sector chat with more info for everyone, but I'd honestly be happy with whatever is easiest to implement.
I do however think this suggestion has merit, and is a way better idea than just adding a new dialogue that can be abused. Stopping players using /logoff while a PC is within 5000m would be preferable to me, but that has been discussed and dismissed in the past. Adding a simple notification that the target is about to vanish is not a game breaking deal, in my honest opinion. A target could still take the gamble and try to evade you by login out, if they think they have the time to survive the 10 seconds it takes. They could also try run to empty, and then initiate a /logoff while you try to chase them. This would NOT STOP people from leaving the game, it would not even stop people trying to log out to evade/cheat death. It would just enable players to make an informed decision on weather to open fire and try wax that sucker or not.
I would personally prefer if this notification was only sent to the person who has you targeted, and not spam sector chat with more info for everyone, but I'd honestly be happy with whatever is easiest to implement.
I'm aware that it doesn't bother you that much, Yoda, but I think it's helpful to point it out again. My first response to your post was along the same level of interest -- in that I also didn't think it was a big deal. Annoying, but not a huge deal. However, then the thread started to gain steam I felt it necessary to lend a stronger voice in opposition, given the strength of arguments in support.
Lecter keeps trying to make this a discussion about persistence, and it's not. That's beyond the scope of what we are discussing. But to some of his recent points:
-Magically escaping is part of VO. If the devs had found it important to announce character departures they would have done it long ago. Clearly popping in and out of the universe at one's whim was part of the design.
-One definite bad effect from announcing pending character log offs (or disconnects) in sector is that some people will wait until those moments to shoot people (a big open door to griefing).
-Also, if an unintentional disconnect happens, an announcement of it would be an open invitation to anyone to shoot that character knowing they are defenseless (i.e. shooting in the back). You keep talking about "interaction", but often it's impossible to determine interaction. Just being in proximity to another PC does not mean there has been interaction. And even if there had been interaction (hits taken, chat exchanged), there's no way to determine the nature of the interaction. Someone could just hangout in busy station sectors and farm PKs from disconnecting mobile newbs (something that will no doubt happen with increasing frequency as the game continues to take on more mobile players).
-Logging off is an in-game decision, not an OOG ("out of game") decision. We all have a reasonable expectation for our ship (and its contents) to be removed from the game when we choose to terminate our play session via the normal "log out" function. Until we have a change in persistency from the devs it shall remain so. Forcing characters to persist in game until "you are done with them according to your own made up rules" is overtly unfair. If you don't like it, make a different post and stop trying to force it into this conversation.
I'm not against fixing the guessing game problem -- I agree it is a problem and is worth fixing, especially if the log out timer isn't working correctly. But I think the OP is a bad way to fix it.
Lecter keeps trying to make this a discussion about persistence, and it's not. That's beyond the scope of what we are discussing. But to some of his recent points:
-Magically escaping is part of VO. If the devs had found it important to announce character departures they would have done it long ago. Clearly popping in and out of the universe at one's whim was part of the design.
-One definite bad effect from announcing pending character log offs (or disconnects) in sector is that some people will wait until those moments to shoot people (a big open door to griefing).
-Also, if an unintentional disconnect happens, an announcement of it would be an open invitation to anyone to shoot that character knowing they are defenseless (i.e. shooting in the back). You keep talking about "interaction", but often it's impossible to determine interaction. Just being in proximity to another PC does not mean there has been interaction. And even if there had been interaction (hits taken, chat exchanged), there's no way to determine the nature of the interaction. Someone could just hangout in busy station sectors and farm PKs from disconnecting mobile newbs (something that will no doubt happen with increasing frequency as the game continues to take on more mobile players).
-Logging off is an in-game decision, not an OOG ("out of game") decision. We all have a reasonable expectation for our ship (and its contents) to be removed from the game when we choose to terminate our play session via the normal "log out" function. Until we have a change in persistency from the devs it shall remain so. Forcing characters to persist in game until "you are done with them according to your own made up rules" is overtly unfair. If you don't like it, make a different post and stop trying to force it into this conversation.
I'm not against fixing the guessing game problem -- I agree it is a problem and is worth fixing, especially if the log out timer isn't working correctly. But I think the OP is a bad way to fix it.
I don't have any problem with the notion of a targeted ship showing a logoff or network-condition state for that character, and/or simply a targeting notification when the character becomes server-side (persisting post-logoff).
I do have a problem with alternate suggestions that involve the ability to remotely pop up modal dialogues on other users. And, even without modal dialogues, I'm not a huge fan of solving the general problem with a highly specialized (pirate-only) solution. The target-disconnecting information is a better way to go.
-Magically escaping is part of VO. If the devs had found it important to announce character departures they would have done it long ago. Clearly popping in and out of the universe at one's whim was part of the design.
What? No. Then we would never have added a logoff timer or disconnect-persistency at all. Actually, the OP here is an old idea, and still a reasonable one. It's been on my radar for a long time.
I do have a problem with alternate suggestions that involve the ability to remotely pop up modal dialogues on other users. And, even without modal dialogues, I'm not a huge fan of solving the general problem with a highly specialized (pirate-only) solution. The target-disconnecting information is a better way to go.
-Magically escaping is part of VO. If the devs had found it important to announce character departures they would have done it long ago. Clearly popping in and out of the universe at one's whim was part of the design.
What? No. Then we would never have added a logoff timer or disconnect-persistency at all. Actually, the OP here is an old idea, and still a reasonable one. It's been on my radar for a long time.
Inc has spoken.
Yoda - 1
Greenwall - 0
Yoda - 1
Greenwall - 0
What? No. Then we would never have added a logoff timer or disconnect-persistency at all.
Even with the timers and persistency as they currently are it still feels like we are (and have been) purposefully provided the essential ability to appear and disappear wherever and whenever we'd like. As I've already stated, disappearing immediately clearly makes no sense.
Anyway, I'll be interested to see how such a change affects the game.
Even with the timers and persistency as they currently are it still feels like we are (and have been) purposefully provided the essential ability to appear and disappear wherever and whenever we'd like. As I've already stated, disappearing immediately clearly makes no sense.
Anyway, I'll be interested to see how such a change affects the game.
+1 to OP
I'm looking for content in Suggestions replies that directly speaks to the subject at hand, and avoids attacking or mocking any particular individual, or point of view. I don't care how much you disagree, or are frustrated with the divergence of perspective.. that is the behaviour I expect here.
Don't bait people, mock people, or attack them. Focus on the topic, or don't post at all.
Don't bait people, mock people, or attack them. Focus on the topic, or don't post at all.
I guess we can take your answer as a Soon(TM)? If so feel free to lock this thread Incarnate. I doubt further discussion is really necessary.
Yeah, the most I can say for now is that I'll try to bump the priority and perhaps include this with other HUD-related development in the next few months. But, we're a little swamped right now.