Forum Settings
       
This thread is locked

PVP Worlds...Follow

#252 Jun 03 2013 at 1:49 PM Rating: Excellent
GDLYL wrote:
IKickYoDog wrote:
They just need to hurry up and make Persona Arena / Mortal Kombat Online / Street Fighter Online and call it a day Smiley: laugh


Wrong! Pokemon MMO plz.


You know, i have never understood why Nintendo has not done this yet.... I mean it's a cash cow waiting to be milked.
#253 Jun 03 2013 at 2:05 PM Rating: Decent
30 posts
BartelX wrote:


Look at that, you just inferred something about me. Shall I point you to the quote in your sig about it? Hehe, just kidding. You need to lighten up a bit. I called you arrogant because you made an arrogant statement. I wasn't making an inference, I was making an observation. You can infer that my observation was actually an inference... but... circular logic... blah blah, not getting anywhere. I apologize for my bluntness, it's a trait that always shows through when I'm debating something. My mom tells me I should have been a lawyer... I tell her she should have been a better mother (to be fair, she was sh*tty most of the time and she knows that I still love her regardless). It's just my nature to be blunt and say what I'm thinking.



I wanted to login a few minutes after you made that post to say this, but alas, I lost my information and spent a few days wondering if I should just make a new account...anway.

By observing someone and then making a statement about said observation (example: "You're being a ****, Tom.") you are making an inference. Whether or not that inference is valid or not doesn't matter. At least in the context of statistics. You are taking information you have observed, processing/analyzing it, and then stating a conclusion. In this example, you aren't really making statistical inference on Kachi's arrogance (though I suppose you could if you had prior data on how many times people used those words and actually said "I'm being arrogant" or whatever). Statisticians place probabilities on their inferred statements using theoretical distributions, which I doubt you were doing consciously, though I don't doubt you were using personal experience with language and prior encounters to make the statement.

Anyway, this doesn't add much to the thread, it has just been scratching at the back of my head for a while.

Now, for my on topic take on the thread. I agree with open world PvP probably doesn't belong in a FF themed universe, for several reasons that have been talked about already in the thread. I do agree an arena or battlefield (battlegrounds from WoW) would be appropriate. FFT for the psp for example had the ability to challenge others to a battle. And I don't see why you have to limit PvP to simply beating the living hell out of another guy. Triple Triad, Tetra Master, chocobo racing, even chocobo breeding added in there would be awesome throw back to the golden era of FF games, and still be PvP.
#254 Jun 03 2013 at 2:06 PM Rating: Decent
**
262 posts
Ostia wrote:
Tanks/healers had waiting times of 1-10 seconds, DD's had waiting times of 30 Minutes, thus you have the majority of the population waiting on a minority, that is a problem


I hope I'm awake enough now that you indeed did say this and I am quoting you correctly.

This makes sense to me because there are usually a ton more DD jobs than healer/tank jobs.

My thinking is, that if you make it to where the party doesn't need a healer/tank but can still function albeit not as efficient that you'll still mostly have the same issue you have now with people just waiting on the optimal set up with healer/tank. But if you go too far with making every class more versatile in the party setting then it becomes what's the point of having a healer/tank when I can grab an extra DD or 2 and the fights are faster therefore more efficient.

I don't have a solution for it. I'm not a game designer who gets paid to try to come up with these solutions. But I guess it just doesn't bother me that much to be honest. I actually like the holy trinity. It makes me feel like we're all a cog in the wheel to keep things going. If one is missing then things just aren't going to work out as well as it could.
#255 Jun 03 2013 at 2:10 PM Rating: Decent
**
273 posts
Kachi wrote:
Lack of available high value units (e.g. healers, tanks) is a widely accepted problem in most MMOs, not just my opinion.



ostia wrote:
That is a factual statement, you do not have to agree, is a fact, you only have to accept It. See you like to argue giving your opinion, so that others give theirs and in the case you cannot disprove the other persons opinions, you back off and agree to disagree, but sadly he stated a fact, and you basically agreed with him, you just stated it as "In my opinion it should be like that" and he stated it as "Yes is a problem, but we have come to accept it"

Which again is a fact, the Wow dev team has said so countless times, the perfect example was when they introduced the server wide party feature, Tanks/healers had waiting times of 1-10 seconds, DD's had waiting times of 30 Minutes, thus you have the majority of the population waiting on a minority, that is a problem. Why do you think in Swotor every class had a healing abilitie ? Or that GW2 moved away from the trinity ? All this games have seen the problem and have tried to address it in their own ways, have they come up with the perfect solution ? Nope! But they are all trying in their own way.


I'm just curious as to how this is "just a fact" and that it should "just be accepted." The premise of your entire argument can not be quantified, or has not been at least, and is by a matter of definition, not a fact.

Edited, Jun 3rd 2013 5:17pm by Parathyroid
#256 Jun 03 2013 at 2:18 PM Rating: Excellent
Guru
***
1,310 posts
iontheable wrote:
Holy cow...What did I start?

Apparently people are more passionate about PVP than I thought :P


Only in this case PvP stands for poster versus poster Smiley: lol
#257 Jun 03 2013 at 2:20 PM Rating: Decent
30 posts
Hatamaz wrote:


I hope I'm awake enough now that you indeed did say this and I am quoting you correctly.

This makes sense to me because there are usually a ton more DD jobs than healer/tank jobs.

My thinking is, that if you make it to where the party doesn't need a healer/tank but can still function albeit not as efficient that you'll still mostly have the same issue you have now with people just waiting on the optimal set up with healer/tank. But if you go too far with making every class more versatile in the party setting then it becomes what's the point of having a healer/tank when I can grab an extra DD or 2 and the fights are faster therefore more efficient.

I don't have a solution for it. I'm not a game designer who gets paid to try to come up with these solutions. But I guess it just doesn't bother me that much to be honest. I actually like the holy trinity. It makes me feel like we're all a cog in the wheel to keep things going. If one is missing then things just aren't going to work out as well as it could.


I have to agree with you here. I tried GW2 because it looked really awesome, and the idea that "the trinity was dead" seemed really cool. Then I did beta/live. I realized I actually liked having a defined role for PvE (nevermind PvE in that game wasn't great to begin with). I normally end up going with a tank class. It is usually the first class I level in an MMO, and the class I play most consistently. I thought with GW2, a tank would be general, anybody can tank, you tank by dps'ing, etc. Instead it was more of...nobody tanks, nobody heals, everybody goes ranged and kites. Granted I didn't play long after release for the reasons I stated previously, but that's what it felt like when I called it quits.

What's actually incredible, and you can see this in WoW, the number of tanking/healing classes doesn't actually have much to do with queue times. There are people who will only queue as DD on a paladin, even though they could potential do all three. Adding in DK to WoW didn't help the tank situation, as DK's queued as DPS. Adding in monks didn't do much, if anything, either as again, they only queued as dps. The problem seems tanks/healers take a majority of the blame for encounters going badly, and/or are expected to out gear/know everything about the encounter if it has been more than 2 weeks since the expansion was released. This makes it very hard for a newbie to break into the tanking game.

Also an interesting observation, when WoW did their queue for raids, tanks actually had 30-60 minute queues, dps were around 10-15 minutes. Which is telling of another problem in that raids only needed 2 tanks, but 17 dps. So single group activities required 1:3 tank dps ratio, where raids needed a 2:17, which is incredibly different.

At any rate, I have no great solutions to these problems, only observational/anecdotal examples and some weak conclusions based on them. Though I do agree that, in my humble opinion, watering down roles to get rid of these problems isn't good, and just leads to a pretty boring game overall.
#258 Jun 03 2013 at 2:28 PM Rating: Good
****
6,899 posts
Ostia wrote:
Why do you think in Swotor every class had a healing abilitie ? Or that GW2 moved away from the trinity ? All this games have seen the problem and have tried to address it in their own ways, have they come up with the perfect solution ? Nope! But they are all trying in their own way.


Yep, and swtor classes in pvp AND pve were still completely unbalanced regardless of the fact they were all able to heal and take a relative amount of damage. Want to know why? The EXACT reasons I stated to Kachi as to why his model wouldn't work... every time they added a new variable, they completely screwed up class balance. Why do you think it went from consulars being OP, to smash spec sents, to vanguards, to now gunslingers? Because as soon as they try to add anything to the game, it ruins their entire sense of balance and takes them forever to fix it, if they even bother to.

If it were so easy to fix that all the time, a company like Bioware would have done so. It's also the other reason I mentioned, that players will find ways to abuse the system to their advantage, which is exactly what happened in swtor. There were all sorts of little bugs where you could spam a certain ability and break the GCD, or find some kind of error in the code that allowed abilities to stack when they shouldn't. It happens in EVERY game.

Kachi's approach doesn't solve this, it will run into these exact same problems, thus unbalancing the classes and forcing them to dumb down the content, much like what happened with both swtor and GW2. Then you get a bunch of overly generic classes that have almost identical mechanics to avoid the whole mess. Most of the classes in swtor AND gw2 are incredibly similar frameworks with slightly different abilities. It's boring, and it's the main reason I stopped playing both games... that and a complete lack of meaningful endgame, which I think is mostly due to them constantly having to spend so much time rebalancing the classes.
Xoie wrote:

Only in this case PvP stands for poster versus poster Smiley: lol


Lol, that was worth a rateup. Smiley: clap

Edited, Jun 3rd 2013 4:35pm by BartelX
____________________________
Bartel Hayward--- Ultros Server
The Kraken Club <ZAM>
50 WAR • 50 MNK • 50 MIN • 50 GSM • 50 ARM • 50 LTW • 50 CUL • 50 WVR
thekrakenclub.shivtr.com
#259 Jun 03 2013 at 2:40 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
****
4,780 posts
Having difficulty in my desire to reply, honestly. Conversations here derail too much and it makes me omit possibly critical converational tangents in favor of not involving myself into the drama.

Moving on...

Thayos wrote:
Quote:
This idea that Healers should do always poorly in PVP is just ludicrous, history in PvP has shown that aside from pure ganking, verses combat has always favored the defensive or ranged. White Mage is both. The kits are separate, but PvP and PvE kits are similar, white mage would kite the crap out of DDs with statistical effect like bind and weight. And the DD would, in effect, rely on ranged skills and gap closers to win.


Although you make a great point, this is somewhat different than what Kachi and I were discussing. This kind of strategic kite fest (crowd control) isn't exactly what either type of job was intended for... jobs like red mage, bard, thief or blm can do it better. What we're talking about is if a whm and a DD are literally going toe-to-toe, should the whm have a 50-percent chance of winning? Should the whm's cures/defensive spells be so potent (on the individual caster) that a DD with equally tiered gear can't mow him down?

Your quote above, to me, is evidence that none of us really expects a whm to survive toe-to-toe against a DD, because the job simply isn't designed to take lots of damage like that. We all know that a whm's best chance to survive is either to run, or be protected by his party members.


See, this argument the two of you are having seems silly. It's like expecting a ram fighting a tiger and expecting the ram to use it's hooves and teeth rather than its horns, because that's how the tiger fights.

Of COURSE a regular DD class is going to win in a Damage Dealing race against a healer. That's not how a healer fights when it's alone. The idea of combat balance is that the two's classes have their own tools for fighting one another so that in the end it becomes a factor of skill not a factor of "Hurr I kirr yoo caz I dealz damage!"

White Mage, or probably more importantly Conjurer, seeming that would likely survive better , is a casting class. It will fight like a casting class, not a melee. This means kiting, disabling, and damaging the opponent down at range.

Where as a Melee like Dragoon or Lancer will want to close that range, deliver stuns and burst the enemy down before they can be CCed and the enemy recovers.


The chances of a White Mage surviving if he stands toe to toe with a dedicated damage dealer, meaning just sitting there tanking damage. Should be fairly small, even if he built himself up defensively. But if he plays like he should, keeping the enemy at a range, taking advantage of the enemy's own weaknesses and playing at their own strengths? That's where it should be a '50/50' issue. The mechanics should be designed so that, aside from equipment and level differentials, each fight should feel 'close' on the one on one scale. This is because if it's close in the single player scale, then the group combat becomes much more intriguing - a matter of tactics rather that stacking the least weak class to absurd levels.


#260 Jun 03 2013 at 2:44 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
****
4,780 posts
Ostia wrote:
GDLYL wrote:


Wrong! Pokemon MMO plz.


You know, i have never understood why Nintendo has not done this yet.... I mean it's a cash cow waiting to be milked.


Cause they're not done milking the handheld market yet. They're printing money by making slight variations of the same basic system over and over again, making their production costs tiny. It took them how many games to finally break into 3D through one of their primary titles?

They'll hit MMO levels once they start losing major numbers off their handhelds, then they'll have somewhere along the lines of five generations of Pokemon players leaping into a likely subscription based MMO and Nintendo never has to worry about finances again.

It's an incredibly intelligent long term game.
#261 Jun 03 2013 at 2:46 PM Rating: Good
****
9,997 posts
Quote:
How did I make it personal exactly? By calling you arrogant? You are being arrogant. Arrogance is an attitude of superiority or self-importance. You claiming that others can't comprehend or understand your point is arrogance, especially when it's been laid out for you clear as day. Everything I've posted after that was in response to you making some demeaning or belittling comment about myself or the rest of the community. I really don't care if you want to discuss it with me or not anymore, because it's abundantly clear you will just ignore anything you don't like by claiming I don't get it, when I think it's pretty clear I do. That's not even an argument or debate. It's acting like a child when you don't get your way. (oh sorry, that's probably a personal attack in your eyes)

Anyways, I'm done here. Talking to brick walls gets old.



Right, well I guess I'll leave it to you to tell me what I think of myself and others. You don't know what my attitudes are. You're not a mind reader (yes?). To me, the idea of feeling superior or self-important over knowledge of video game mechanics is completely laughable. It's so far removed from my feelings of self-worth that you might as well accuse me of being arrogant because I have pretty okay toenails, and frankly I'm sorry--if not dubious--that you think anyone would actually think that way. I'm more apt to believe that what's happened here is that you sensed confidence that to you, seemed unworthy, so you had to do your civic duty to try and take me down a peg.

I am not arrogant, and just because you inferred otherwise doesn't make it so. I don't think I'm better than or more important than you. I do think in certain realms I have a better way of doing things. Now, you obviously feel the same way or you wouldn't take it upon yourself to tell me why you're right in all of this and I'm wrong. But I find it funny that when you're condescending, you're just "calling it like you see it," but when I point out things of that nature

You feel that I've slighted you--fine. I can apologize for that, but I do feel that I should have the opportunity to explain where I'm coming from.

Re: the argumentative jackass. I honestly wasn't calling you a jackass by some transitive property of insult. You were the one who kicked that off with telling me, "You lose," which is about the most juvenile argument tactic I can imagine. Now, if I call that tactic juvenile, to me, I'm not directly calling YOU juvenile, but the practice of doing so juvenile. If you don't do it, I won't think you're juvenile (nor will you seem like an argumentative jackass, at least by virtue of that). But I guess wherein your rules of engagement are concerned, I don't see how I'm the one who brought the arrogance into the conversation when you had just as much confidence that I was wrong as I had that I was right from the get-go (and you definitely did not understand my point right away).

Re: evolution. At this point in the conversation, you most definitely did not demonstrate an understanding of what I was saying. You might have understood SOME of the major premises, but not the supporting rationale behind them. When you say, "No, I understand," you don't understand how badly you really don't understand. You don't understand the mathematical systems of game balance--you haven't once tried to engage me through that perspective, which is fine--I don't expect most people would want to talk about it or want a lecture on it, and I wouldn't want to give it in a format like this, so I wanted to keep things simple. But when you say that you understand, that's literally equivalent to saying, "No, I get it. You think that people came from the same ancestors as monkeys. Here's why I disagree," without making any effort to be enlightened on the biological or anthropological concepts that inform the other side of the argument.

All that is fine! I wasn't saying that you were stupid for not understanding! But when I deal with people whom I consider mature, and I inform that that they don't understand something, they don't automatically assume (he thinks I'm stupid because there's something in the world I understand! I understand everything!). They try to understand by asking directed questions to broaden their understanding of an unfamiliar perspective. They understand that whether I'm right or wrong, they can learn something from the discussion. They understand that I'm giving them feedback on the conversation that allows them to ask questions that they want answered, so I don't just jump into a lecture that might not even address the gap in understanding. But when the only effort you make to understand the other side is taunt them like a FOX political pundit, "Oh yeah? What about X. You can't explain that!" then the opportunity for an objective and productive discussion is lost.

That opportunity is always on the table as long as I'm around. However much you feel that I've contributed to the escalation of a conflict, I can step back and bring it down to earth on my end so that I've at least done my part for getting back on track. I have tried to do that here, for all the good it did. In particular, if you do feel slighted, then remaining respectful yourself, rather than making me think that you're weak, will just make me feel like that much more of a jackass for offending such a respectable person.

Nonetheless, I apologize if I've insulted you. It was unintentional. I really hope you believe that, because otherwise you leave me with no means of recourse.

For me, it is important that I am understood. I know that people misunderstand my intentions as well as my arguments. I'm used to it! And I don't blame other people for that. The concept of blame/fault doesn't really even exist in my worldview. Because of differences in worldview, I don't always understand how others will perceive the things I will say. And for me, being able to be understood for who I am--to not be misjudged--is important. It doesn't matter to me if you personally misjudge me, but when I can't communicate myself to you, it means that I haven't socially navigated the situation the way I intended to. I have the benefit of knowing that I'm not the arrogant, mean, jerk that you think I am. There's a disconnect that I'm trying to bridge, all while staying on topic and not launching into lengthy expositions about what I really think as some sort of public "Dear Diary" entry.

So again, I sincerely apologize to anyone that I have personally offended. I do tell people when I perceive fault in their method or views at times--I don't think there's anything wrong with that. I try to do so constructively, and not turn opportunities for civil discourse that could realize personal growth into childish arguments. But for as high as I strive, I am only human, and don't see myself as being above anyone else.

So tl;dr for everyone, here's what I'm going to do: Ask that you accept my apology, and in the future, if you perceive that I am being arrogant, I hope you will understand that this is just me failing to display confidence gracefully. If I seem to be suggesting that you don't understand something, please understand that it's because I'm trying to identify what I perceive as the communication failure in the discussion--not an insult towards you. And if I insult you, just tell me, "That insults me," and I will apologize with all due sincerity. I do not enjoy upsetting other people, and if you ever start to think otherwise, I would appreciate the benefit of the doubt.

Edited, Jun 3rd 2013 1:47pm by Kachi
#262 Jun 03 2013 at 2:50 PM Rating: Good
****
6,899 posts
Quote:
The chances of a White Mage surviving if he stands toe to toe with a dedicated damage dealer, meaning just sitting there tanking damage. Should be fairly small, even if he built himself up defensively. But if he plays like he should, keeping the enemy at a range, taking advantage of the enemy's own weaknesses and playing at their own strengths? That's where it should be a '50/50' issue. The mechanics should be designed so that, aside from equipment and level differentials, each fight should feel 'close' on the one on one scale. This is because if it's close in the single player scale, then the group combat becomes much more intriguing - a matter of tactics rather that stacking the least weak class to absurd levels.


See, but we weren't arguing the situation in a vaccuum under ideal conditions, where the whm and the DD see each other at a distance, both agree to commence combat, and then start the fight. We were talking in the heat of battle, where they are already toe to toe. Kachi even mentioned that in a post, saying that the whm's healing should solely be enough to keep pace with a damage dealer's attacks. Which is seems ludicrous given the circumstances.

Regardless, even under the ideal circumstances I would expect a DD to win out more often given equal skill, just based on the fact that they can pump out WAY more damage in a much shorter time frame. Even just 1 resist would probably be enough time for the DD to take down the mage... which is as it should be imo. WHM or CON isn't built as a 1 on 1 class. It shouldn't be. Not all classes need to be able to take out others 1 on 1. What a whm WILL excel at is getting in behind a couple DD, and healing them constantly as they massacre the other team. Right there, the utility and benefit of a whm in PvP just grew exponentially, and gives them a specific role where they can thrive. Being able to do that AND go toe to toe with melee is the epitomy of unbalance.
#263 Jun 03 2013 at 3:05 PM Rating: Default
****
6,899 posts
I feel this about sums up the debate Kachi, probably from both of our sides:

https://fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-frc3/686_10151651211356578_1075723688_n.jpg

Seriously though, I don't take offense by anything you've said. I've had far worse directed at me on these boards, heck, far worse than Ostia has called me as well. I really don't care at this point. I've already apologized a couple times, so I'm going to forego it again and just move on. I find your manner of debate incredibly boring and conceited, and it's just not worth my time anymore. Have a good one.
#264 Jun 03 2013 at 3:11 PM Rating: Good
**
660 posts
Quote:
He deserves to be talked down to, it's how he treats everyone else, and I think you deserve what you give.


Out of this entire thread, this is the main thing that's bothering me. I don't see it as him talking down to anyone. Kachi knows what he's talking about. He doesn't go around directly insulting people or calling their ideas worthless. If you're perceiving his posts as demeaning, it says more about you than it does about him. If you have a problem with the way he speaks, glance over his posts and keep it moving.
#265 Jun 03 2013 at 3:16 PM Rating: Decent
**
262 posts
So, we've come to the consensus of no world PvP in XIV correct?
#266 Jun 03 2013 at 3:19 PM Rating: Decent
**
273 posts
Atkascha wrote:
Quote:
He deserves to be talked down to, it's how he treats everyone else, and I think you deserve what you give.


Out of this entire thread, this is the main thing that's bothering me. I don't see it as him talking down to anyone. Kachi knows what he's talking about. He doesn't go around directly insulting people or calling their ideas worthless. If you're perceiving his posts as demeaning, it says more about you than it does about him. If you have a problem with the way he speaks, glance over his posts and keep it moving.


Talking to you is like teaching someone about evolution who understands nothing about biology.

Or perhaps I could say you're coming off as a Jackass...

I hope you don't interpret either of those as me talking down to you. Unless of course, someone is butting in without reading the whole conversation?

Edited, Jun 3rd 2013 5:22pm by Parathyroid
#267 Jun 03 2013 at 3:23 PM Rating: Good
****
9,997 posts
I address both of those things in the post above.
#268 Jun 03 2013 at 3:24 PM Rating: Good
**
655 posts
http://www.pokemon-world-online.net/game.php

pokemon is online.. heh
#269 Jun 03 2013 at 3:25 PM Rating: Default
**
273 posts
Kachi wrote:
I address both of those things in the post above.


Don't mind me, I'm just insulting people now... I'm going to explain it away a few days from now.
#270 Jun 03 2013 at 3:26 PM Rating: Excellent
Atkascha wrote:
Quote:
He deserves to be talked down to, it's how he treats everyone else, and I think you deserve what you give.


Out of this entire thread, this is the main thing that's bothering me. I don't see it as him talking down to anyone. Kachi knows what he's talking about. He doesn't go around directly insulting people or calling their ideas worthless. If you're perceiving his posts as demeaning, it says more about you than it does about him. If you have a problem with the way he speaks, glance over his posts and keep it moving.


This kind of where I am in regard to this thread. I think some of Kachi's analogies are a little rough around the edges, but I feel his sig says what I'm really thinking.

Kachi's signature wrote:
Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.
#271 Jun 03 2013 at 3:34 PM Rating: Default
**
273 posts
IKickYoDog wrote:
Atkascha wrote:
Quote:
He deserves to be talked down to, it's how he treats everyone else, and I think you deserve what you give.


Out of this entire thread, this is the main thing that's bothering me. I don't see it as him talking down to anyone. Kachi knows what he's talking about. He doesn't go around directly insulting people or calling their ideas worthless. If you're perceiving his posts as demeaning, it says more about you than it does about him. If you have a problem with the way he speaks, glance over his posts and keep it moving.


This kind of where I am in regard to this thread. I think some of Kachi's analogies are a little rough around the edges, but I feel his sig says what I'm really thinking.

Kachi's signature wrote:
Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.


Hilarious... Congrats Kachi, you somehow managed to sling the mud around and eventually walk out clean as a whistle.
#272 Jun 03 2013 at 3:38 PM Rating: Excellent
****
9,997 posts
I apologized like three times. What more do you want? To hang me in effigy?

Edit: I also explained very thoroughly how any insult was totally unintentional. If you don't believe me, there's really nothing more I can say to convince you. But it's the truth, and you can't really expect me to lie about my intentions just so I'll save face in your eyes.

Edited, Jun 3rd 2013 2:41pm by Kachi
#273 Jun 03 2013 at 3:41 PM Rating: Excellent
Kachi wrote:
I apologized like three times. What more do you want? To hang me in effigy?

Edit: I also explained very thoroughly how any insult was totally unintentional. If you don't believe me, there's really nothing more I can say to convince you. But it's the truth, and you can't really expect me to lie about my intentions just so I'll save face in your eyes.

Edited, Jun 3rd 2013 2:41pm by Kachi


He's got a definite hard-on for you, that's for sure.
#275 Jun 03 2013 at 3:45 PM Rating: Excellent
****
9,997 posts
Well that's mature.
#276 Jun 03 2013 at 3:53 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
3,599 posts
There's some serious hive-minding going on here. I don't know who started it but daddy's gonna finish it.
____________________________

[ffxivsig]1183812[/ffxivsig]
This thread is locked
You cannot post in a locked topic!
Recent Visitors: 54 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (54)