Results on horse vote? - Phoenix Freeshard

Any chance we could get the results of the vote on horses?

And why do I have a feeling a slight majority voted against it but the plan is to keep anyway with modifications?

Thu 4 Jun 2020 11:57 PM by ExcretusMaximus

A majority is a majority, and it should dictate whether the horses stay even if it was one person.

I didn't vote, because I don't care one way or the other.

Fri 5 Jun 2020 8:04 AM by

Uthred

Quik wrote: ↑
Thu 4 Jun 2020 11:16 PM
Any chance we could get the results of the vote on horses?

And why do I have a feeling a slight majority voted against it but the plan is to keep anyway with modifications?

The vote hasnt ended yet. We will publish the result as soon as it over. Every voting that has happened so far, the result has been posted on the forum. Not sure why you have such feelings about this voting, but please dont spread any lies or wrong assumptions.

Fri 5 Jun 2020 4:08 PM by Quik

Uthred wrote: ↑
Fri 5 Jun 2020 8:04 AM
Quik wrote: ↑
Thu 4 Jun 2020 11:16 PM
Any chance we could get the results of the vote on horses?

And why do I have a feeling a slight majority voted against it but the plan is to keep anyway with modifications?

The vote hasnt ended yet. We will publish the result as soon as it over. Every voting that has happened so far, the result has been posted on the forum. Not sure why you have such feelings about this voting, but please dont spread any lies or wrong assumptions.

Thanks for the reply, but exactly where did I spread false information or lies? I said why do I have a FEELING which implies I have no idea, but it is my personal opinion.

I have given my support on 99% of the things Pheonix has done, but really...where did I state ANYTHING as fact? Or are we not allowed to have an opinion now?

Fri 5 Jun 2020 6:00 PM by

Uthred

You are saying (or having a feeling) that no matter what the result will be, we will put in horses even if "a slight majority voted against it". This is just wrong (or a lie) and implies that the staff doesnt care about the voting and/or the community, which is also wrong.

Just to remind you: At first we wanted to put in horses without any voting at all. Only because of the feedback of the community we decided to start a voting. So why should we start a voting and then not following it?

Fri 5 Jun 2020 6:34 PM by Quik

Uthred wrote: ↑
Fri 5 Jun 2020 6:00 PM
You are saying (or having a feeling) that no matter what the result will be, we will put in horses even if "a slight majority voted against it". This is just wrong (or a lie) and implies that the staff doesnt care about the voting and/or the community, which is also wrong.

Just to remind you: At first we wanted to put in horses without any voting at all. Only because of the feedback of the community we decided to start a voting. So why should we start a voting and then not following it?

Uthred wrote: ↑
Fri 3 Aug 2018 6:49 PM
There are hasteners (at every keep) that give 10 mins speed. We will not have rvr-horses and we will also not have speed tokens. We are not planing any other additional speed boost things.

Although not everybody likes to hear that, but we think that giving speed to every class (by horse, pots or token) would totally change the balance of rvr. We are always interested in new ideas and there were already a lot of suggestions that we build into the game, but we will not put in any extra speed bonuses. Sorry, if you dont like my answer, but im just honest to you.

That was a direct quote from you and you stated this other times in other ways.

This is why I have my doubts. You told us we would never have horses in rvr and then suddenly you change course.

Please don't act like things don't change without being fully transparent. And also remember, I am the one that keeps saying you guys don't NEED to be transparent because it is your server, and I still stand by that.

But things like this are what makes me have "feelings" things aren't what they appear.

Also, I didn't state anything was fact or not, I just quoted you and posted my opinion on it.

Fri 5 Jun 2020 7:31 PM by Kadal

Quik wrote: ↑
Fri 5 Jun 2020 6:34 PM
Uthred wrote: ↑
Fri 5 Jun 2020 6:00 PM
You are saying (or having a feeling) that no matter what the result will be, we will put in horses even if "a slight majority voted against it". This is just wrong (or a lie) and implies that the staff doesnt care about the voting and/or the community, which is also wrong.

Just to remind you: At first we wanted to put in horses without any voting at all. Only because of the feedback of the community we decided to start a voting. So why should we start a voting and then not following it?

Uthred wrote: ↑
Fri 3 Aug 2018 6:49 PM
There are hasteners (at every keep) that give 10 mins speed. We will not have rvr-horses and we will also not have speed tokens. We are not planing any other additional speed boost things.

Although not everybody likes to hear that, but we think that giving speed to every class (by horse, pots or token) would totally change the balance of rvr. We are always interested in new ideas and there were already a lot of suggestions that we build into the game, but we will not put in any extra speed bonuses. Sorry, if you dont like my answer, but im just honest to you.

That was a direct quote from you and you stated this other times in other ways.

This is why I have my doubts. You told us we would never have horses in rvr and then suddenly you change course.

Please don't act like things don't change without being fully transparent. And also remember, I am the one that keeps saying you guys don't NEED to be transparent because it is your server, and I still stand by that.

But things like this are what makes me have "feelings" things aren't what they appear.

Also, I didn't state anything was fact or not, I just quoted you and posted my opinion on it.

yea so they changed their stance on a particular thing (kinda, since lets be honest horses are close to useless in rvr anyway, which is fine, so not even really contradicting himself i would say) over 2 years and now they just generally lie to the community? nice conclusion there bro.
saying things change without being transparent and accusing them of basicly lying are two different things btw. and yes, thats what you did, if u didnt mean it that way you might wanna rephrase it.

Sat 6 Jun 2020 12:08 AM by Cadebrennus

Uthred wrote: ↑
Fri 5 Jun 2020 6:00 PM
You are saying (or having a feeling) that no matter what the result will be, we will put in horses even if "a slight majority voted against it". This is just wrong (or a lie) and implies that the staff doesnt care about the voting and/or the community, which is also wrong.

Just to remind you: At first we wanted to put in horses without any voting at all. Only because of the feedback of the community we decided to start a voting. So why should we start a voting and then not following it?

That being said, what is your current stance on other wildly unpopular ideas that you guys have proposed? You can respond here or in the other threads.

Sat 6 Jun 2020 6:15 AM by Astaa

The devs have changed their mind based on player feedback. I can't understand why this is a problem for people?

Sat 6 Jun 2020 4:57 PM by chryso

ExcretusMaximus wrote: ↑
Thu 4 Jun 2020 11:57 PM
A majority is a majority, and it should dictate whether the horses stay even if it was one person.

I disagree. The horse change is a big one. I think that unless there is a vast majority who want them they should not go in.

Sat 6 Jun 2020 5:34 PM by Quik

chryso wrote: ↑
Sat 6 Jun 2020 4:57 PM
ExcretusMaximus wrote: ↑
Thu 4 Jun 2020 11:57 PM
A majority is a majority, and it should dictate whether the horses stay even if it was one person.

I disagree. The horse change is a big one. I think that unless there is a vast majority who want them they should not go in.

This is my point. Since beta the staff has been adamant they would never add horses...ever. They gave good reasons which I personally agree with and was happy they said they would never add them.

People act like a vast majority of the population have ben asking for horses, but in fact the vote was stupidly close so obviously it was not a vast majority or even close.

I am wondering why the staff decided to do a 180 and decide to add horses suddenly, and almost did it without a vote.

I don't see a 49-51 vote as a reason to add or take away anything. Should need to be at least 55% or 60% before any major changes are done.

Mon 8 Jun 2020 8:25 AM by Lillebror

+1 changes like this should have atleast a 60-40 win to be activated

Mon 8 Jun 2020 9:19 AM by Blitze

I wholeheartedly agree, And if the shambles that is Brexit taught us anything it is that pushing through massive change on a 52/48 split, just forces huge divides in your society.

I originally voted no, then changed my mind to yes; Succumbing to selfishness as a solo Friar.

Mon 8 Jun 2020 9:38 AM by MigSelv

Tbh, i hardly see anyone using the horses.
With the crazy timer in place, they are good enough to run to the next dock and get hastener speed.

The fact that a Thane's self buffs, restart the horse timer, is odd.

That said, having a horse in PvE, i like.

Mon 8 Jun 2020 10:58 AM by Noashakra

Nobody is using horses, so what is it going to change? I regret paying once 5p for my horse, and I will not get it for my other toons. But if people are happy with them why not.
You don't want them just for the sake of it.

Mon 8 Jun 2020 11:22 AM by Razur Ur

i paid 10p because the quest is to annoying without speed class :-D

Mon 8 Jun 2020 5:03 PM by Quik

Razur Ur wrote: ↑
Mon 8 Jun 2020 11:22 AM
i paid 10p because the quest is to annoying without speed class :-D

The good news is, now that you paid 10p for your horse you now have speed5 if you ever want to go back and do the quests =)

Sun 14 Jun 2020 4:19 AM by Nachtfee

Can you please adjust the quests, in Albion kill 5 of them and 5 of them etc. in Hib / Mid Farm 5 of them and 5 of them I had to kill over 15 mobs to get the desired 2-3 items