Pets in the toxic zone...working as shelter.

[unionova]

Am I the only one who think using this overlooked consequence of the pet system is not only in bad taste regarding pvp but also in fact an exploit?

Take it like a (wo)man, dont hide behind your daikibas, people.

m. You must report errors and bugs to MindArk whenever you discover them. Neglecting to report errors or bugs, or using bugs, slow connection, Internet latency, or 'exploits' for own benefits may result in a termination of your Account, including its Virtual Items, funds, and abilities.

[Coffee]

Originally Posted by unionova

Am I the only one who think using this overlooked consequence of the pet system is not only in bad taste regarding pvp but also in fact an exploit?

Take it like a (wo)man, dont hide behind your daikibas, people.

Yes you are . Seriously though, I don't think this can be considered an exploit. If the cowboys of yester-year could use there horses for cover then why not a Diakiba for the future? Besides, this finally puts melee users into a position to enter PVP like never before. They can be on even footing with rifle users.

Tactic, yes. Strategy, yes. Exploit, no.

[Outman]

Bad taste can be considered as stealing a miners loot to, this is just a way to make it a fair fight.

[Sircus]

Ah I see a future landgrab, everybody dies and u can read afterwards that the LA now belongs to Mikka´s Daikiba Stalker since it stayed by the claimrod for more than 1 hour

[unionova]

Originally Posted by Coffee

Yes you are . Seriously though, I don't think this can be considered an exploit. If the cowboys of yester-year could use there horses for cover then why not a Diakiba for the future? Besides, this finally puts melee users into a position to enter PVP like never before. They can be on even footing with rifle users.

Tactic, yes. Strategy, yes. Exploit, no.

Well, I guess you can look at it like that. I dont.
It would be ok if in fact the pets would be aggro'd, meaning if their owner is attacked they become hostile against the attackar and deal and take damage like other creatures. I hope this will be the case in the future, but if Im not misunderstanding it, its not the case atm.
Now the pets are unattackable, invincible and all they do is block the shots. Added to that they are unaffected by the contamination. This means that the pet owner have absolutly nothing to lose. Some cowboy who hides behind his horse at least have to walk all the way back to town and buy a new horse.

Originally Posted by Outman

Bad taste can be considered as stealing a miners loot to, this is just a way to make it a fair fight.

That is the intention of the toxic zones.
Bad taste in PvP is does not includ playing according to the system, but to use invisibility bugs, bugs that make others crash at the site of your avatar and graphic glitches to be untouchable.

[Zwaff]

New idea:
You could also use tamed animals to surrender your enemies in pvp if you've got enough animals. Just put them in a circle around your enemy and he/she won't be able to move ( if the animals are tall enough and can't be jumped on that is )

[Walter]

Originally Posted by Zwaff

New idea:
You could also use tamed animals to surrender your enemies in pvp if you've got enough animals. Just put them in a circle around your enemy and he/she won't be able to move ( if the animals are tall enough and can't be jumped on that is )

hehe, i think it take a lot of time to put them in circle, and your enemy kill you before you put the second daikiba into the "circle"

[Coffee]

Originally Posted by unionova

Well, I guess you can look at it like that. I dont.
It would be ok if in fact the pets would be aggro'd, meaning if their owner is attacked they become hostile against the attackar and deal and take damage like other creatures. I hope this will be the case in the future, but if Im not misunderstanding it, its not the case atm.
Now the pets are unattackable, invincible and all they do is block the shots. Added to that they are unaffected by the contamination. This means that the pet owner have absolutly nothing to lose. Some cowboy who hides behind his horse at least have to walk all the way back to town and buy a new horse.


That is the intention of the toxic zones.
Bad taste in PvP is does not includ playing according to the system, but to use invisibility bugs, bugs that make others crash at the site of your avatar and graphic glitches to be untouchable.

It may seem a little unfair at the moment since pets don't currently take damage. I disagree about the pet owners having nothing to loose though. It takes energy and time to get a pet from point a to b. That has to be replaced with Nutrio bars. Furthermore if a pet is used to escape a fight it will end up being abandoned in that spot. This will cause the pet to be auto stabled wich will cost experience and trust. That means more nutrio bars and pet brushing to get it back to it's original level. Prices have gone down some on these items but it's still going to cost the person using a pet this way.

I do agree it will be more interesting though when they finally add the ability for pets to deal and be dealt damage.

[MG Mighty]

Originally Posted by unionova

Well, I guess you can look at it like that. I dont.
It would be ok if in fact the pets would be aggro'd, meaning if their owner is attacked they become hostile against the attackar and deal and take damage like other creatures. I hope this will be the case in the future, but if Im not misunderstanding it, its not the case atm.
Now the pets are unattackable, invincible and all they do is block the shots. Added to that they are unaffected by the contamination. This means that the pet owner have absolutly nothing to lose. Some cowboy who hides behind his horse at least have to walk all the way back to town and buy a new horse.


That is the intention of the toxic zones.
Bad taste in PvP is does not includ playing according to the system, but to use invisibility bugs, bugs that make others crash at the site of your avatar and graphic glitches to be untouchable.

That's not an exploit.
It's an perfectly acceptable use for our

personnal moving walls

which is the only use that pets currently have for the majority of people

to create a wall.

Attackers just need to go arround the wall that the toxic effect won't be warmed.

Besides I doubt that anybody can actually use this except in random desperate situations to escape with a TP chip.


And the pet owner will loose something:
When the pet autostables it will loose energy (and if it as some it will also loose trust and experience). Unless he retruns back to the pet and fight.

[Lyper]

Nice one Mate