:

[Mykey]

I consider, that you commit an error. Let's discuss. Write to me in PM.

[The Sociologist]

*EDIT For added support* Seiously.... How many create an account, can`t use violence, and never log back in

Depends on what message they get, I suppose, since people are used to "sandbox" features in many other strategy games.

Must say I didn't know this feature still existed. It means that everyone who's spawned in a certain forest in the past umpteen months who actually speaks was spawned by existing players. That's because just about the first thing they're asked to do is test their combat skill, and so far all have done so. Hmm.

[Solutions Maximus]

Since on the tabula rasa principle, a person shouldn't have an urge to use violence when they've never experienced such.

On the contrary. Violence is an animal instinct. Were we not raised with the morals to not fight, the world would be much more bloody and far less organised. It is an infantile thing, really. Think of a child who's toy is taken away. How does he react? Despair? Violence?

The child will hit and kick and bite and scream, provided he is old enough to control his limbs and has not been taught that this is wrong.

It's raw... animal.

[Mykey]

Now all is clear, I thank for the help in this question.

[Wilmer Bordonado]

Since on the tabula rasa principle, a person shouldn't have an urge to use violence when they've never experienced such.

On the contrary. Violence is an animal instinct. Were we not raised with the morals to not fight, the world would be much more bloody and far less organised. It is an infantile thing, really. Think of a child who's toy is taken away. How does he react? Despair? Violence?

The child will hit and kick and bite and scream, provided he is old enough to control his limbs and has not been taught that this is wrong.

It's raw... animal.

I do agree with your opinion.
But in the end... is 2 days too much? Couldn't the new players wait for it?

My opinion: If a charrie from a new player can't attack others, then he/she shouldn't be attacked, during the same period of time.
Isn't it fair?

So when it's twelve o'clock... "C'mon man, what have you said?"... Fight starts!!

Wilmer B.

[g1asswa1ker]

I don't know if this has been suggest or even if I have suggested it before but I feel once something attacks you be it person or animal then that attacker should be reset for attacks.

for example:

0001-1 "A" hits "B" with a bare fist.
(can not hit "B" for the full rotation yet)

0001-2 "B" hits "A" with a bare fist.
("B" can not hit "A" for the full rotation but has reset the count for "A" in relation to "B")

0001-3 "A" hits "B" with a bare fist.
("A" can not hit "B" for the full rotation but has reset the count for "B" in relation to "A")

this would make a bit more sense to me...
tiredness still being applied of course resulting in one death and the other left panting for air and rest. (Should it continue that far) or two tired combatants staring each other down being unable to effect each other any further.

[Solutions Maximus]

I agree, there should be a two or three or four day rule. I just don't like the suggestion that characters won't know violence if they don't see it.

Glasswalker: I like it.

[Mykey]

The authoritative answer, curiously...

[Solutions Maximus]

It's not necessarily a protection for new players. More of a guard against annoyance to older players.

[Mykey]

The same...

[g1asswa1ker]

I don't know if this has been suggest or even if I have suggested it before but I feel once something attacks you be it person or animal then that attacker should be reset for attacks.

for example:

0001-1 "A" hits "B" with a bare fist.
(can not hit "B" for the full rotation yet)

0001-2 "B" hits "A" with a bare fist.
("B" can not hit "A" for the full rotation but has reset the count for "A" in relation to "B")

0001-3 "A" hits "B" with a bare fist.
("A" can not hit "B" for the full rotation but has reset the count for "B" in relation to "A")

this would make a bit more sense to me...
tiredness still being applied of course resulting in one death and the other left panting for air and rest. (Should it continue that far) or two tired combatants staring each other down being unable to effect each other any further.

I don`t really follow.... So if B never hit A back, he couldn`t attack again

You never really paid much attention in math did you...(just a joke don't feel bashed) Anyways...

If "B" Doesn't hit "A" after "A" attacked him then "A" couldn't attack "B" for a full rotation as in not for a 24 hours earth time( 8 hours cantr time) to which the counter would normaly rest anyways.

[Mykey]

Absolutely with you it agree. It seems to me it is very good idea. Completely with you I will agree.

[Solutions Maximus]

Well, sorry Mykey. It's just that I've created so many new characters, but I've never needed to hit within the first day they were spawned. I proved that fact by not knowing that this was implemented.

Just imagine everyone that would complain if new players started hitting people right when they spawned. It would happen. There was an epidemic for a while of newspawns (must not have been new players) hitting people just so they could die and the player could make a new character.


EDIT: Ok, I'm tired.

[Mykey]

Paraphrase please the message

[Solutions Maximus]

Maybe. But then you have their corpse lying around. I remember when it took days to bury bodies.... ugh.