iAmGoku

Members
  • Content Count

    441
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About iAmGoku

  • Rank
    Hamel Navy Officer

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. For standard bans this is the case, yeah. The easiest example aside from this would be when someone got a custom ban with their name as the reasoning. Or a long, long time ago when someone got banned for whining on the forums so they were banned. The reasoning given was something like "QQ lord" or something along those lines. But the original point was with special cases, when rules are not explicit about a situation that results in a user getting banned, and then getting banned. That's the issue here.
  2. Gotta ask how you find it understandable. You broke a rule and got banned, you should know what rule you broke, yeah? I will never understand how this line gets tossed around so often when the rulesets are explicit for everyone. What happens here is that the userbase is given the impression that there are implicit rules and that, due to the fact that it's staff discretion when things are ban-worthy or not regardless of any stated rules, you absolutely can be punished for something you genuinely don't think is going to get you in trouble. Lack of transparency here causes a ton of distrust within the community and it's why Void has gained such a negative reputation overall (not counting just within this community).
  3. I've seen the light and the answer is obvious. We will make the new barrier to entry +11 type void or foj as well as +10 minimum full elrianode. Obviously you will need full IB and an endgame title. Maybe have a limit on how low ERP can be? IDK just spitballing but I'm sure the arena Bros will figure that out. 10/10 idea it won't crash and burn at all let's go.
  4. The problem isn't what is more fun. The problem is that when you involve arena stats, you're insulting the integrity of actual competition. You cannot claim something competitive when players are not presented on equal footing. Truthfully, none of the 3 options in the poll are what's necessary. They're far better off keeping arena stats and rebranding it to a brawl out in which everyone who participates earns something rather than there being a 1st place. Vanilla is boring but technically is the most competitive, arena might be interesting but is the least fair.
  5. For obvious reasons, this shouldn't be going live. If your goal is to mix up what happens in tournaments, then add in rule sets that don't challenge the integrity of the gameplay. This tournament, as it stands, exists to challenge the hardwork put into learning their character (something that PvP should reward) rather than the work they put into their stats (something that PvE should reward).
  6. This is probably the most realistic answer for you, op. Most of the bis items for your character will be gotten far, far faster with cashing compared to grinding it out. There really is no point in saying if it's better or not compared to the officials when you have such a massive amount to grind for just to catch up regardless.
  7. Low ec rates is a good thing for the strictly f2p players. They have only to gain from it. But yes, from a spender's pov, it's not good. Personally it's why I stopped loading up outside anything decent being in the IM. When the rates were .5:100, which lasted for 3 days before void tripled the ed rate, there was a pretty big war between sellers and buyers about what the rate should be. If there's no incentive to load up, ec sellers will eventually decrease in activity. Not a good or a bad thing for the server since people will still load up for their own convenience, but it will still have its results.
  8. This is disingenuous. Gc is only popular with br players still. That has been the case even with officials when bgc had multiple filled servers. Elsword isn't popular with any community to that extent, as seen by every server, including void, being reduced drastically in playerbase over the years.
  9. That level of inflation is pretty crazy. Can only imagine what it would do to prices in the long run if kept.
  10. Value of an item isn't a fair argument. If anything, it's an indicator that it's time to release it again. Sorry to those who spent money like that, but the market is a gamble.
  11. Believe it was already said this wasn't doable due to Elsword's coding. The boss thing wasn't done because it interferes with the drop rate list that they otherwise would have (rosso raid accs, el tears, etc). The best course of action I'd say is to create a daily and a weekly quest, as well as a repeatable. Repeatable giving 2, daily giving 3-4, weekly giving 15-20. Possibly a monthly depending on how long the event goes on, but probably not (have the daily and weekly be the same for all modes).
  12. Getting a consistent 4 and 5 shard per run at 11-2. Doesn't seem too terrible there at least, but fusion did seem lower than usual in amount.
  13. Probably a result of them changing channel capacity at some point. During Void's peak when they were having the same "fullness" you could see it in-game with sparring rooms being fairly plenty, most dungeons usually having at least a few people in them, and areas were full, as well as fields. Whether or not Void is dying aside, channel capacity doesn't really mean much.
  14. Think they put that there as a way of getting people to burn all the ed they expected everyone to be pouring into the economy. If you didn't do type void to sell shards, you would be relying on dungeon clears for the bulk of it (assuming you weren't selling anything like costumes). But obviously that does conflict with the whole Christmas present ordeal as it's no longer a present and more just a cool reward from an event. 2 years ago people were getting free IB sets, last year was a free +10, this year is "work for your present." I'm not against having players work for their stuff, but it doesn't match well with the holiday season theme.
  15. Sure they have their use in ERP grinding. No one here is denying that. But until you have solid evidence from the staff that this was the intended purpose behind the items being added, you don't get to make such a wild claim. Sure. But the initial problem was you said PvE players deserve higher income because of pots. So I ask again, what makes them so important that you literally cannot PvE without them (and I mean LITERALLY)? Well never mind on the last part, you just admitted it here. Also, the second part legitimately creates the largest amount of irony in your post and I'm genuinely concerned you don't see that. You are paying for luxury. They are not required. You do not deserve higher income because you use pots. You even admitted they are not required. This was already explained. In a niche market, increasing supply does not mean you're going to increase demand with it. This lowers overall profit for no reason other than you want to spend less money. That's not a win-win. That only works if the demand for said items increases with the supply increasing. Otherwise you end up with a surplus. ERP leveling is a niche market. This is the basis of the entire paragraph but the essence of it was already responded to on page 2. You misinterpreted and that's my fault for poor wording. Vote in this context is implying who is actually correct in the argument. And in that case, you are absolutely losing.