Let's Put These Arguments To Bed
-
Alright, until such time as an /ignore feature is added to the game we're all forced to see the same stupid re-cycled nonsense bandied about concerning the presence of red players in the game. These arguments have been thrown out there since UO '98 and each and every one of them is utter trash. From now on if we see these arguments the only correct response is to point and laugh.
Pro Red:
Reds are necessary for a good economy: Actually, no. Durability reductions and more difficult monsters in PvE could keep the economy rolling along just fine without your dumb arse. While the developers may decide to balance the economy with reds in mind, that isn't the same as reds being needed for the job.Reds are an important part of risk vs. reward: Actually, no. A player is already risking gear and time by engaging difficult monsters which can also be adjusted in PvE to achieve the same effect. While reds are a part of the equation in this game, they're not required for it at all. We can talk about risk when your red arse is doing something besides camping defenseless noobs at the goblins.
Con Red
Reds shouldn't be in the game: You need to learn to read the box before making a purchase. Reds are here to stay, and they're an important part of this title.Reds just camp noobs at the Goblins: Some do, but that is the 'reward' part of their risk equation. If you want gold, to Terra, if you need goblin skills farm there in the first 40 hrs. of play or don't loot anything and carry nothing but food.
I'm tired of the same nonsense coming from both sides of the aisle.
If you don't like sheriffs, don't be red.
If you don't like reds, stay in Terra.Stop spamming general chat.
These arguments are done.
-
If you murder me in the game it completes your knowledge points for Forum Trolls.
-
Too late, reds (gankers) killed it when pve folks were forced to get skills over there. They long gone.
