Oh please. I'm tired of people acting like there's some kind of conspiracy to keep Glom's pkers from having any fun. Glomdoring is boring right now. If @Celina wanted to break X treaty, she should just come out and say so. So should @Tarkenton. The issue I see with it is that for all the arguments that "pkers are the only ones that matter"- the pk-crowd in certain circles seem to be the ones least willing to advocate for the policies they claim to want. Then they complain about the results. If it's your intention to cause conflict, then cause conflict, and also be prepared to deal with the consequences, "hurt feelings" and "political drama" and all. Cowards!
...I mean, not that I'd support it IC, but at least -something- would happen.
When I first started playing, @Hyrtakos, it certainly felt more like Serenwilde was winning and constantly beating down Glomdoring(hard to say that wasn't just my perspective as inexperienced). Made for interesting moments of justifying 'whatever we have to do to survive.'
"Chairwoman," Princess Setisoki states, holding up a hand in a gesture for her to stop and returning the cup. "That would be quite inappropriate. One of the males will serve me."
1. One of the most important things you're ever going to learn in life, much less Lusternia, is that you really can't expect someone else to live by the rules you live by. As an extension of that, you can't expect people in other orgs to not use tactics you wouldn't use yourself. If Celest refuses do a quest to stymie Magnagora, but Magnagora has no qualms, that's not Magnagora's fault. Celest's handicap is of their own making.
2. This isn't Happy Playtime Land. We don't "take turns", and we don't expect others to want to take turns just because we want to (See the first part of this post). Moreover, expecting someone to instantly want to compromise is foolish. Kelly made a major mistake when she made a public post asking Thalkros to compromise. She should have waited until Celest had something to hold over Magnagora before she even tried. Now she looks like she was needy, and Thalkros jumped on it like a dog presented with a big piece of bloody meat. If you want to blame someone for Celest's problems lately, blame the city leader who rarely shows up except for domoths and fights, leaves half the city's ministers either unfilled/inactive or filled with personal friends, and doesn't really do much to lead except in battle. No offense to her.
Everiine said: The reason population is low isn't because there are too many orgs. It's because so many facets of the game are outright broken and protected by those who benefit from it being that way. An overabundance of gimmicks (including game-breaking ones), artifacts that destroy any concept of balance, blatant pay-to-win features, and an obsession with convenience that makes few things actually worthwhile all contribute to the game's sad decline.
It's a well known fact that Thalkros the brocharacter feeds off trash talk, public posts, and general meaningless threats.
Yes I refused to acknowledge a request at taking turns, for the exact reason Shaddus stated.
Yes I refused leaving cay neutral because all it takes is someone 'accidentally' doing it at the lasy second and viola one side is good to go.
Yes I refused that silly little 'for your people's own good' post because my peoples morale has never been better and I'm not that much of a tyrant in their eyes.
Yes I kicked it up a notch in response to the <24 hour crusade post because you're(general you) just asking for it at that point.
I feel like the public(3 people tops) outcry could have been avoided if there had been better rp/offers
0
Cyndarinused Flamethrower! It was super effective.
This might be the first time I've ever been accused of not causing enough conflict. Especially with Hallifax and Celest. I literally killed the Hallifax CL during an event just because I didn't like Hallifax and I knew I could get away with it. I really don't know where that stance comes from. Pkers certainly aren't the only ones that matter, but whether people
The problem with a non com causing conflict a combatant causing conflict is that the conflict the combatant causes can get them kicked out of the org for treaty violations. Engaging in yet another squabble over the Court over treaties is just par for the course at this point, and only slightly less boring than doing nothing like we are now. If I'm being brutally honest, an alliance with Hallifax was inescapable, and everything I did to prevent it was just a dog and pony show. The Court was pretty dead set on their direction from the get go from any objective perspective.
All I got from Arcanis' post saying that "raising Marilynth does nothing to hurt Magnagora" is that, in that sense, maybe it was a mistake to weaken those quests to no longer give any mechanical penalties. They used to prevent doing the power quest (which was also used to grief), but by removing that and not putting anything else in place you basically have no disincentive but RP in doing those quests. And if your RP is "do whatever to screw the other side," then you do not even have that. Dumbing things down is not always the answer.
This might be the first time I've ever been accused of not causing enough conflict. Especially with Hallifax and Celest. I literally killed the Hallifax CL during an event just because I didn't like Hallifax and I knew I could get away with it. I really don't know where that stance comes from. Pkers certainly aren't the only ones that matter, but whether people
No, they don't, and it's a bad argument to say otherwise, but it's something I keep hearing implied, ic and oocly. But that's not really the issue.
The problem with a non com causing conflict a combatant causing conflict is that the conflict the combatant causes can get them kicked out of the org for treaty violations. Engaging in yet another squabble over the Court over treaties is just par for the course at this point, and only slightly less boring than doing nothing like we are now. If I'm being brutally honest, an alliance with Hallifax was inescapable, and everything I did to prevent it was just a dog and pony show. The Court was pretty dead set on their direction from the get go from any objective perspective.
Right, because that's the direction that it felt we were being forced into by other orgs... but if you agree with the reasons why we did it, and that it was inevitable, then why the complaining? It just kinda feels like you decided from the start that you wouldn't like the way things turned out, but were determined to let it happen anyway.
Actually, a 'non-com' causing conflict would be pretty easy to justify kicking out of an org, imo, if they weren't doing anything useful otherwise. Troll-alts come to mind, and no one risks much by getting rid of them. Combatants could come back and "grief" you, so there is some incentive to work with them, if they aren't being horribly obnoxious to your own people, too... In general, though kicking out an established character for any reason is not easy(and shouldn't be), and whether it's easier for combat/non-combat reasons would largely depend on the situation and the person in question.
And I dunno, @Celina. Maybe I just wish more of this forum drama would occur in the game, to where I'd notice it or care.
"Chairwoman," Princess Setisoki states, holding up a hand in a gesture for her to stop and returning the cup. "That would be quite inappropriate. One of the males will serve me."
All I got from Arcanis' post saying that "raising Marilynth does nothing to hurt Magnagora" is that, in that sense, maybe it was a mistake to weaken those quests to no longer give any mechanical penalties. They used to prevent doing the power quest (which was also used to grief), but by removing that and not putting anything else in place you basically have no disincentive but RP in doing those quests. And if your RP is "do whatever to screw the other side," then you do not even have that. Dumbing things down is not always the answer.
I don't know anything about that quest, but yeah, that solution seemed obvious and I'm glad someone pointed it out...
"Chairwoman," Princess Setisoki states, holding up a hand in a gesture for her to stop and returning the cup. "That would be quite inappropriate. One of the males will serve me."
I hope nobody ever believes my characters are ever there to troll
Everiine said: The reason population is low isn't because there are too many orgs. It's because so many facets of the game are outright broken and protected by those who benefit from it being that way. An overabundance of gimmicks (including game-breaking ones), artifacts that destroy any concept of balance, blatant pay-to-win features, and an obsession with convenience that makes few things actually worthwhile all contribute to the game's sad decline.
In the past month or two, Glomdoring has seen the effective removal of two of its primary sources of griefing: @Arcanis trollchopping elders, and Serenwilde doing downtime raids. As a person who largely rides the non-com train, I thought these things were a massive PITA, and really kinda ruined the enjoyment of playing. And yet without them? It's goddamn BORING.
At least getting griefed was -something- happening. It was aggravating, sure. But hey, if Seren raided us, we would get to raid them right back. Glom pre-emptively declared war on Magnagora, and since then... no one has really done anything. Except Arcanis, but he was doing it anyways. Does war just mean that we don't fight on the same side on domoths and revolts? Because that's dumb. We weren't doing that anyways.
This game NEEDS conflict. I vote religiously on that damn topmuds thing, and I don't know what other IRE games have going on, but Lusternia is struggling to even keep in the 10-20's. A few years ago, we were routinely top 10, and could make big pushes to top 5. Is this a result of no worthwhile conflict? Maybe, maybe not. I'm willing to give it a shot, though, if it means more people coming, more people playing, and more stuff happening.
Seriously, let some grief happen. @Aeldra seems to have the right idea here. Someone blocking your quest? Rally your entire city! Someone gank you? Get your PKers to gank them! No one will because of Avenger? Complain until the admin have to nerf the hell out of Avechna! If there's ever a need for "complain for change" it needs to be in the direction of making the game -more- active, not less. Because someday, this game will wither and die. That will be a sad day. I don't want it to happen. And if that means Arcanis can chop some trees to give us the excuse to gather everyone from Glomdoring, Hallifax, and Celest to do a Nil raid and kill the Demon Lords, so Mag can respond by killing Avatars, so we can have a renewed reason to "complain for change" on how ridiculous it is to actually kill those mofos, and about the 2mil essence enemy territory deaths... I'll take it. Just... breathe some life into the game, please.
The purpose of writing is to inflate weak ideas, obscure pure reasoning, and inhibit clarity. With a little practice, writing can be an intimidating and impenetrable fog!
I hope nobody ever believes my characters are ever there to troll
I've heard you only ever troll your own alts. Which is inevitable, since you play everyone.
"Chairwoman," Princess Setisoki states, holding up a hand in a gesture for her to stop and returning the cup. "That would be quite inappropriate. One of the males will serve me."
1. One of the most important things you're ever going to learn in life, much less Lusternia, is that you really can't expect someone else to live by the rules you live by. As an extension of that, you can't expect people in other orgs to not use tactics you wouldn't use yourself. If Celest refuses do a quest to stymie Magnagora, but Magnagora has no qualms, that's not Magnagora's fault. Celest's handicap is of their own making.
2. This isn't Happy Playtime Land. We don't "take turns", and we don't expect others to want to take turns just because we want to (See the first part of this post). Moreover, expecting someone to instantly want to compromise is foolish. Kelly made a major mistake when she made a public post asking Thalkros to compromise. She should have waited until Celest had something to hold over Magnagora before she even tried. Now she looks like she was needy, and Thalkros jumped on it like a dog presented with a big piece of bloody meat. If you want to blame someone for Celest's problems lately, blame the city leader who rarely shows up except for domoths and fights, leaves half the city's ministers either unfilled/inactive or filled with personal friends, and doesn't really do much to lead except in battle. No offense to her.
Oh god, the sweet truthful burn of this post is beautiful.
All I got from Arcanis' post saying that "raising Marilynth does nothing to hurt Magnagora" is that, in that sense, maybe it was a mistake to weaken those quests to no longer give any mechanical penalties. They used to prevent doing the power quest (which was also used to grief), but by removing that and not putting anything else in place you basically have no disincentive but RP in doing those quests. And if your RP is "do whatever to screw the other side," then you do not even have that. Dumbing things down is not always the answer.
You could, and I wouldnt mind, but then we would have simply taken Marilynth down after. Also I personally would love if penalties were returned, then Mag would have an excuse to defend Ladantine and keep him on his lovely ship for more than 20 mins.
In the past month or two, Glomdoring has seen the effective removal of two of its primary sources of griefing: Arcanis trollchopping elders, and Serenwilde doing downtime raids. As a person who largely rides the non-com train, I thought these things were a massive PITA, and really kinda ruined the enjoyment of playing. And yet without them? It's goddamn BORING.
At least getting griefed was -something- happening. It was aggravating, sure. But hey, if Seren raided us, we would get to raid them right back. Glom pre-emptively declared war on Magnagora, and since then... no one has really done anything. Except Arcanis, but he was doing it anyways. Does war just mean that we don't fight on the same side on domoths and revolts? Because that's dumb. We weren't doing that anyways.
This game NEEDS conflict. I vote religiously on that damn topmuds thing, and I don't know what other IRE games have going on, but Lusternia is struggling to even keep in the 10-20's. A few years ago, we were routinely top 10, and could make big pushes to top 5. Is this a result of no worthwhile conflict? Maybe, maybe not. I'm willing to give it a shot, though, if it means more people coming, more people playing, and more stuff happening.
Seriously, let some grief happen. Aeldra seems to have the right idea here. Someone blocking your quest? Rally your entire city! Someone gank you? Get your PKers to gank them! No one will because of Avenger? Complain until the admin have to nerf the hell out of Avechna! If there's ever a need for "complain for change" it needs to be in the direction of making the game -more- active, not less. Because someday, this game will wither and die. That will be a sad day. I don't want it to happen. And if that means Arcanis can chop some trees to give us the excuse to gather everyone from Glomdoring, Hallifax, and Celest to do a Nil raid and kill the Demon Lords, so Mag can respond by killing Avatars, so we can have a renewed reason to "complain for change" on how ridiculous it is to actually kill those mofos, and about the 2mil essence enemy territory deaths... I'll take it. Just... breathe some life into the game, please.
I FEEL SO APPRECIATED!
0
Cyndarinused Flamethrower! It was super effective.
This might be the first time I've ever been accused of not causing enough conflict. Especially with Hallifax and Celest. I literally killed the Hallifax CL during an event just because I didn't like Hallifax and I knew I could get away with it. I really don't know where that stance comes from. Pkers certainly aren't the only ones that matter, but whether people
No, they don't, and it's a bad argument to say otherwise, but it's something I keep hearing implied, ic and oocly. But that's not really the issue.
The problem with a non com causing conflict a combatant causing conflict is that the conflict the combatant causes can get them kicked out of the org for treaty violations. Engaging in yet another squabble over the Court over treaties is just par for the course at this point, and only slightly less boring than doing nothing like we are now. If I'm being brutally honest, an alliance with Hallifax was inescapable, and everything I did to prevent it was just a dog and pony show. The Court was pretty dead set on their direction from the get go from any objective perspective.
Right, because that's the direction that it felt we were being forced into by other orgs... but if you agree with the reasons why we did it, and that it was inevitable, then why the complaining? It just kinda feels like you decided from the start that you wouldn't like the way things turned out, but were determined to let it happen anyway.
Actually, a 'non-com' causing conflict would be pretty easy to justify kicking out of an org, imo, if they weren't doing anything useful otherwise. Troll-alts come to mind, and no one risks much by getting rid of them. Combatants could come back and "grief" you, so there is some incentive to work with them, if they aren't being horribly obnoxious to your own people, too... In general, though kicking out an established character for any reason is not easy(and shouldn't be), and whether it's easier for combat/non-combat reasons would largely depend on the situation and the person in question.
And I dunno, @Celina. Maybe I just wish more of this forum drama would occur in the game, to where I'd notice it or care.
Okay so, little known secret about my involvement in the Gaudi/Mag/Halli drama was that after we had decided Mag was out of the equation but Gaudi was a maybe, Synkarin and I were working behind the scenes with Steingrim and Salome to negotiate a possible new alliance without Mag. Ultimately it didn't work out because neither side was willing to risk that much for a "maybe."
It's not exactly a secret that I received amnesty to go into Mag to negotiate directly with Silvanus without Court approval (which caused its own drama), just to get some kind of ball rolling. Given, the whole Mag coup cue exodus to Glom happened, but that's another story.
I think, from any objective standpoint knowing just how involved I was with Mag and Gaudi, it's not fair to say I was determined to let Hallidoring happen. While I am convinced my efforts were for naught from the start, and knew that going into it, that doesn't mean a very involved attempt was not made by Glom's PK community to not let it happen. It also does not mean I agreed with the ultimate end result. It does mean that, in order to not get thrown out, I had to ultimately acquiesce to Glom's laws. Even established characters can't ignore the laws and not expect serious ramifications.
What I knew on an OOC level throughout the whole ordeal is that unless Glom was willing to attack Gaudi, this would result in a stalemate. The reality is, Court decisions are decided on by non coms at the moment, for better or for worse, but the PKers decide how it plays out. So the Court could agree on whatever treaty they wanted, but unless they PKers were willing to pursue the conflict/treaties decided by the Court and the PKers decided to start raiding Mag and Gaudi, nothing was going to happen. That is simply the reality.
Faulting me for not being able to change that, or not willing to constantly rail against the non com/casual PK majority of the Court without any real hope of success isn't all that fair. While stirring drama and conflict on the Court is certainly enjoyable for me at times, it is not what attracts me to log on. PK is, and unless the Court is willing to consider the PK environment, a thing they appear to be relatively oblivious to thus far, there isn't much PK to be had.
0
Cyndarinused Flamethrower! It was super effective.
Oh, for the record, no one here or otherwise implies PKers are the only thing that matters. What is often dismissed is how PK and conflict drive the game's success. In fact, I will argue that as far as Glom's treaties were concerned, the actual PK and PKers were literally the last thing on the list the Court cared about. We know this because the scenario we are now in, where the PKers aren't willing to suicide raid Mag or start a scuffle with their friends in Gaudi alongside the less than spectacular PK squad of Hallifax (sorry, halli, but it's true) was LITERALLY spelled out to the Court.
The court wanted people like me to buddy buddy with people like Elanorwen and be cool with the inevitable deaths and essence loss that would follow with little to show for it. So we opted for solution 3) the Court can have its treaties, the PKers will just sit it out.
So...no, I reject that notion and think there is enough evidence to demonstrate that the reverse can be argued.
Raids on Gaudi would be a good thing for activity, not to mention perhaps spark the rivalry it and Hallifax as suppose to have (which frankly has weak base support as is)
I think what people need to remember is that the orgs are designed to appeal to different interests. In Mag v Celest, things are black and white and it tends to promote no holds barred conflict. Mag & Celest are designed for the extreme conflict that they have right now. Things are a bit more nuanced in Seren & Glom with 'Down with the cities!' being an available agreement for them. (and won't say much more, because who can understand those crazy barbarians) Finally, Hallifax and Gaudiguch are meant to be the most nuanced, and that is why I was drawn to these cities. Pejat has hung out drunk with @Mysrai, chatted with @Mysrai at the Gaudi nexus, gone to the Gaudi festival, etc. (And then @Zvoltz hired me as Shaper?) Pejat knows that Gaudiguch is wrong and will ruin everything, but he likes and pities them. One of my favorite conflict stories is Professor Xavier & Magneto. They are dear friends, but they know they have to fight for what they believe in. I would love to see Gaudiguch and Hallifax develop even more complicated conflict.
As for this conflict discussion, I agree that griefing is bad, but a lack of conflict is bad. I feel like Thalkros was acting IC like he said, and the Celest people were acting IC. Don't retaliate out of spite, participate in conflict because you enjoy the story that you are creating with other people. Try to believe that your enemies are not acting out of OOC spite. If you can't make that assumption, then you may need to take a deep breath.
For Mister Zvoltz, Pejat has been terminated by the Replicant Dynodeon.
I've always disagreed with how this PK/non-com division comes up, but it's hard to articulate the issues with the perspective I see. I want to try, however.
The biggest issue is between competitive and non-competitive players.
You don't need to PK to be competitive. Similarly, you can be non-competitive but still have a primary interest in PK with little else to tide you over. You see this in people desperately looking for a support role of some sort all the time.
Competitive players will almost always do better on the PK front, however, simply by virtue of their motivations. They have a much stronger desire to get better and win for no other reason than to do just that, whereas the non-competitive crowd's far more likely to be satisfied with just making a given objective regardless of how messy it is. The competitive type can still win but feel disappointed because of all the things they noticed going wrong that could have been better (some of the worst arguments I've seen have been immediately after a "win", specifically with this type in mind).
This is something that is trickier than the PK/non-com division because it has much deeper roots than the game itself. It's awkward and unnatural for competitive people to try to act non-competitively, and vice versa. Each type tends to find the other annoying when over-exposure occurs, or if one takes too much prominence in how things are handled.
This is also very much Hallifax's own problem, because it is very much non-competitive and the culture just has a way of attracting that personality type. It's very much noticeable even down to the family drama (what family drama, you say? My point exactly).
This influences PK and other activities in ways that are a difficult for me to define, but as example: a target is hindered significantly, and is near several different kill conditions. However, over the course of 10 seconds, in spite of being in these ranges they never actually die. No one is actually jocking for the kill, just trying to help get to it.
Years ago, competitive and non-competitive players were more evenly distributed, imo. They are concentrated in different factions moreso now, simply by virtue of that commonality keeping them more at ease in a group. Competitive types are going to be even more motivated to remain with a competitive crowd by virtue of wanting all the tools needed to win, and since one person cannot wield all the skills they need to win on their own, that means looking for people who will invest that same energy without pause with a different set of skills.
I think this is also what's allowed Magnagora to keep going so well over the years. Yes, the city has had dips, but they're relatively few compared to most other orgs imo. The org culture itself promotes competition on pretty much all fronts, making it far more attractive to a competitive mind. No amount of skill changes are really going to sway that.
Instead of thinking of what you can do for PK vs. non-com, I say figure out where you are on competitive and non-competitive spectrum and what you can do with that, and figuring out where and how you can strike a better balance for them when it is visibly lacking.
Attempting to not be whiny about this, what is the opinion on people killing others for the reason of "you're a city enemy"?
You know, in Lusternia you don't even have to have a 'valid' reason for killing someone. Individual orgs might set limits due to alliances etc, but there is no onus on the attacker to have some well thought out, lengthy rped session deciding to kill someone for a really good justifiable reason.
And Magnagora is probably the org that uses that excuse the most 'You're from Celest' is a self-explanatory reason for killing.
Death is not a big deal. ESPECIALLY if you are a lich. What power does death have over those who have taken their fates into their own hands and granted themselves nigh immortality? (I miss Magnagora roleplay ) Long story short, brush it off and let it go. Nothing feeds a troll more than knowing not only did they kill you, you're still upset about it. Like the kill that keeps on giving.
A thought of curiosity: How many of those who self-identify as Pkers actually go out of their way to RP? How many non-coms will participate in PK, even though they know they suck at it? There's definitely overlap, but I don't think it negates the fact that the divide is real for a lot of people.
PK people often seem bored by talk, of any kind. The conflict they seek is PK. I get the feeling RP conflict (without any violence whatsoever, just people feeling clever at each other) doesn't feel legitimate to some. I can definitely attest that a lot of times "killing me because I am there" doesn't feel like valid RP, because I didn't RP it and I didn't ask for it.
PK people ignore RP all the time. It's an easy way to not deal with what's unwanted, and I don't blame you for it. But it's also a part of where I feel like the frustration comes from. If I RP at you, and it's unwanted, you don't even notice. If you PK at me, I must rise to your interaction, or be mechanically punished for it.
I'm not actually sure what I'm trying to say, these are all just more musings. But I definitely feel like we used to not hold each other's fun against each other as much as we do now. i.e. As much as some things about each other have always pissed each other off, we found ways to have fun together anyway. Most of what's public now is just angst.
Mayor Steingrim, the Grand Schema says to you, "Well, as I recall you kinda leave a mark whereever you go."
I like to think I'm a hybrid of the two. Loves my pk, but I'll gladly rp with people.
1
Cyndarinused Flamethrower! It was super effective.
Firstly, I identify as a PKer who RPs heavily. I like to believe Celina has an established personality, history, and traits, and is identified (maybe only in Glomdoring) as more than just a known combatant. I spend more time RPing than PKing, incidentally, even though it is PK that draws me to play the game. I have been order head for three orders, two of which were RP related and not combat related, as well as GM for the Shadowdancers, the Harbingers, and the Cacophony. Though maybe known more as a PKer, I have always been on both sides of this argument. I don't think that the exclusively PK only club is as big as it is believed to be. What I do often see is that a heavy RPer, or the RP snob, will often dismiss a PKer's RP because it doesn't meet some imagined standard of RP. There definitely is a stigma regarding your RP attached to being a heavy PKer, speaking from my own experience.
I actually had an argument about the zen of PK and how we interact with RPers, specifically how the double standard is often against the PKers rather than the RPers as it is often perceived, with Iasmos many, many years ago so I can assure of one thing...the angst is not new. The friction between combatants and non combatants is very, very old. I wish I could find the post, but alas.
Firstly, I identify as a PKer who RPs heavily. I like to believe Celina has an established personality, history, and traits, and is identified (maybe only in Glomdoring) as more than just a known combatant. I spend more time RPing than PKing, incidentally, even though it is PK that draws me to play the game. I have been order head for three orders, two of which were RP related and not combat related, as well as GM for the Shadowdancers, the Harbingers, and the Cacophony. Though maybe known more as a PKer, I have always been on both sides of this argument. I don't think that the exclusively PK only club is as big as it is believed to be. What I do often see is that a heavy RPer, or the RP snob, will often dismiss a PKer's RP because it doesn't meet some imagined standard of RP. There definitely is a stigma regarding your RP attached to being a heavy PKer, speaking from my own experience.
I actually had an argument about the zen of PK and how we interact with RPers, specifically how the double standard is often against the PKers rather than the RPers as it is often perceived, with Iasmos many, many years ago so I can assure of one thing...the angst is not new. The friction between combatants and non combatants is very, very old. I wish I could find the post, but alas.
(Note that I haven't at all read the rest of this thread in detail so this may have already been said or I may not be making sense.)
This is the thing - when I think 'Celina' I think PKer first and foremost. That if I wanted to interact with you in someway (and we are not of the same org) that I'm more likely to meet your blade and be enemied to your org than anything else. That when you (general you), are a PKer to a certain point, that this person is only about PKing and the combat side of things and rp be damned. My perception of things bias in that I'm a non-combatant in that I see this black and white line that there are combatants and non-combatants. That combatants and their whole RP is 'kill X thing because Y' and that if they are not killing something, that they might as well not be around.
Is this viewpoint wrong? I have no doubt that it isn't right (in most cases anyways). But at the same time, the game is built around combative problem solving (when was the last time there was some event that was solved by just talking and not bashing something?), so I accept that those who take part of combat will always have this notion that they don't RP like non-combatants do.
1
Cyndarinused Flamethrower! It was super effective.
I'll note the disparity when a combatant is asked to validate and justify their actions while an RPer is not. For a combatant, combat is often not considered RP for whatever reason. Why isn't what I invest my time, effort, and money into not considered a valid expression of my characters personality and interests? The generally implied reason is that because I enjoy it as a player, it can't translate as RP. It's convenient rather than RP. Yet a person who RPs as a character they enjoy as a player is never questioned about it. I think, because of the constant ongoing discussion regarding PK mechanics, Pk is rarely considered a valid expression of Rp. I would argue that a soldier or violent murderess can be as interesting as a diplomat or politician. Simply because they don't take the time to explain themselves to you doesn't mean that it wasn't a representation of their character. We are allowed to enjoy our characters, and the idea that as a PKer I am forcing my RP on you by playing a character that kills is somehow different than a non combatant who is trying to force a character who fights to justify, explain, or otherwise RP in a way that satisfies the non combatant is ludicrous when you really dig into it. You're asking more of me than you are of yourself. It's the non PKer double standard.
You know, random thought, but I wish letters could be written on more than once. Because then I'd craft awesome form letters and mail them to people after I killed them, and put them for sale in a manse shop.
Comments
1. One of the most important things you're ever going to learn in life, much less Lusternia, is that you really can't expect someone else to live by the rules you live by. As an extension of that, you can't expect people in other orgs to not use tactics you wouldn't use yourself. If Celest refuses do a quest to stymie Magnagora, but Magnagora has no qualms, that's not Magnagora's fault. Celest's handicap is of their own making.
2. This isn't Happy Playtime Land. We don't "take turns", and we don't expect others to want to take turns just because we want to (See the first part of this post). Moreover, expecting someone to instantly want to compromise is foolish. Kelly made a major mistake when she made a public post asking Thalkros to compromise. She should have waited until Celest had something to hold over Magnagora before she even tried. Now she looks like she was needy, and Thalkros jumped on it like a dog presented with a big piece of bloody meat. If you want to blame someone for Celest's problems lately, blame the city leader who rarely shows up except for domoths and fights, leaves half the city's ministers either unfilled/inactive or filled with personal friends, and doesn't really do much to lead except in battle. No offense to her.
Yes I refused to acknowledge a request at taking turns, for the exact reason Shaddus stated.
Yes I refused leaving cay neutral because all it takes is someone 'accidentally' doing it at the lasy second and viola one side is good to go.
Yes I refused that silly little 'for your people's own good' post because my peoples morale has never been better and I'm not that much of a tyrant in their eyes.
Yes I kicked it up a notch in response to the <24 hour crusade post because you're(general you) just asking for it at that point.
I feel like the public(3 people tops) outcry could have been avoided if there had been better rp/offers
Right, because that's the direction that it felt we were being forced into by other orgs... but if you agree with the reasons why we did it, and that it was inevitable, then why the complaining? It just kinda feels like you decided from the start that you wouldn't like the way things turned out, but were determined to let it happen anyway.
At least getting griefed was -something- happening. It was aggravating, sure. But hey, if Seren raided us, we would get to raid them right back. Glom pre-emptively declared war on Magnagora, and since then... no one has really done anything. Except Arcanis, but he was doing it anyways. Does war just mean that we don't fight on the same side on domoths and revolts? Because that's dumb. We weren't doing that anyways.
This game NEEDS conflict. I vote religiously on that damn topmuds thing, and I don't know what other IRE games have going on, but Lusternia is struggling to even keep in the 10-20's. A few years ago, we were routinely top 10, and could make big pushes to top 5. Is this a result of no worthwhile conflict? Maybe, maybe not. I'm willing to give it a shot, though, if it means more people coming, more people playing, and more stuff happening.
Seriously, let some grief happen. @Aeldra seems to have the right idea here. Someone blocking your quest? Rally your entire city! Someone gank you? Get your PKers to gank them! No one will because of Avenger? Complain until the admin have to nerf the hell out of Avechna! If there's ever a need for "complain for change" it needs to be in the direction of making the game -more- active, not less. Because someday, this game will wither and die. That will be a sad day. I don't want it to happen. And if that means Arcanis can chop some trees to give us the excuse to gather everyone from Glomdoring, Hallifax, and Celest to do a Nil raid and kill the Demon Lords, so Mag can respond by killing Avatars, so we can have a renewed reason to "complain for change" on how ridiculous it is to actually kill those mofos, and about the 2mil essence enemy territory deaths... I'll take it. Just... breathe some life into the game, please.
Oh god, the sweet truthful burn of this post is beautiful.
You could, and I wouldnt mind, but then we would have simply taken Marilynth down after. Also I personally would love if penalties were returned, then Mag would have an excuse to defend Ladantine and keep him on his lovely ship for more than 20 mins.
I FEEL SO APPRECIATED!
Estarra the Eternal says, "Give Shevat the floor please."
Does that 2 mean 2 full fleshpot wipes, or just 2 individual fleshpots killed?
This is the thing - when I think 'Celina' I think PKer first and foremost. That if I wanted to interact with you in someway (and we are not of the same org) that I'm more likely to meet your blade and be enemied to your org than anything else. That when you (general you), are a PKer to a certain point, that this person is only about PKing and the combat side of things and rp be damned. My perception of things bias in that I'm a non-combatant in that I see this black and white line that there are combatants and non-combatants. That combatants and their whole RP is 'kill X thing because Y' and that if they are not killing something, that they might as well not be around.
Is this viewpoint wrong? I have no doubt that it isn't right (in most cases anyways). But at the same time, the game is built around combative problem solving (when was the last time there was some event that was solved by just talking and not bashing something?), so I accept that those who take part of combat will always have this notion that they don't RP like non-combatants do.