chappy

well im pretty sure it is. if the choice is to click pirate or pirate and the br were same/similar... you're taking a punt

but if you end up on the wrong side that has immediately resulted in a detrimental effect on 'your team' because you are now forced to either shoot your clan mate or leave. Leaving your clan mate potentially outmatched. Poor game mechanic.

i really dont see how this is abuse? are you suggesting that they only attack when it suits them? how dare they! its worth noting that once they attack a player there is several minutes for you to mount a defense by joining the instance and you dont even have to wait out the invuln timer to join a battle

unfortunately the player probably didnt understand that the game mechanics didnt allow him to shoot you. as clearly he wanted to join the other side and attack you but the current game mechanic makes that a 50-50 proposal (hmm do i join as (pirate a or pirate b?) he lucked out and got the wrong pirate side.. hardly his fault that the game mechanic is terrible.

utilising a game mechanic with the direct reason it exists is hardly an exploit. invisibility and invuln are there to allow players to see what awaits them on an undock. if they dont like it they can dock back up. that sounds like that is exactly what they did. if you want to change a game mechanic because you don't think it works very well i would suggest not blaming the players but instead making a suggestion in the appropriate subforum...

Agree with Balck on this, i think we're on the same wavelength. Im sorry but i disagree wholeheartedly with this line of reasoning. The list does. and the ability of anyone to post whatever they want on it means that players can be stigmatized unfairly. perhaps the person being complained about is actually a serial nuisance. its possible sure. . And perhaps the guy that has decided to name and shame someone also had a bad day and took offence at something another reasonable person wouldnt. And perhaps in their vile mood they embellish the story somewhat. Once its posted and people read it, it's very hard to truely retract and thus the stigmatization occurs. Trying to defend yourself publicly on the internet is also typically a futile exercise that degenerates into an unpleasant mudsling. Such a thread would likely devolve in this way as people attempt to defend their reputation, rightly or wrongly. From a game community POV, having such a smelly threadnaught (and it would become a threadnaught) is surely undesirable.

I am uncomfortable with the calling out concept and naming names. While in the majority of cases it would likely be an appropriate and truthful description of events it nonetheless can lead to a mob mentality and also a guilty until proven innocent onus. Lets please not publicly name individuals, create threads for the purpose and generally devolve into a name calling cycle of negativity. Wait for the ability to report individuals through the game, and if it is really serious then contact the admin via the pm function discretely, as i have done. They take your concerns seriously and I have no doubt they handled my complaint appropriately, do i know what they did in response? no I do not and nor do I need to as I trust them to act in the interest of their game. Anonymous and discrete reporting of players is effective. If they behave commonly in a poor manner regularly the evidence against them will mount and it will not be tainted by mob mentality or the court of public opinion which actually makes the admins and mods job of sanctioning such individuals far easier. Please consider this approach rather than public shaming methods.

wow i shoulda known there would bea potbs thread on here somewhere. POTBS for me was a lot of fun but also one of the most dissapointing game releases i've been involved with. As an aussie i feel we really got shafted by the developers from day 1. the release was handled poorly, the promise of aussie servers (which made sense if they were done at the same time) was not kept. When they did release aussie servers months later, they did so by a deal with the devil (telstra) and thus an already small online timezone (aussie primetime coincides with the lowest ebb globally of all online games in terms of active populations) was cut in half as many stayed on servers they had already made their home. The AU server therefore never hit a population that was viable and those that tried it ended up giving the game away within 2-3 monhts often. Most of the AU community left the game within the first 9 months never to return. My group went on from there to EVE where it became and remains one of the most dominant AU pvp groups in the game. best decision we ever made.

voted for open world and crew/crew management a very close 2nd. Watching the vids it does strike me that the ships appear rather empty. maybe there has been discussion on this previously i don't know but i hope there is consideration for the population of the ships to be varied based on user's computer specs and ability to handle it..