Giving corpses to invincible pets

Mishgul

We all have invincible pets here. Stop using that as an argument.

Antonius

While we're discussing this, here's a short list of other things you can do to preserve corpses even if you die/lose the fight:

• Drop corpses in a subdivision house
• Hand off corpses to somebody who remains in the city
• Drop corpses on a ship

Clearly the solution is to prevent people from using the DROP and GIVE commands with (NPC) corpses entirely.

Khairt

Corpses dropped on ship should fester and make crewmen sick. Dropping corpses in your house or handing them to a friend seems pretty legit

Mishgul

This seems reasonable. Perhaps instead of getting corpses when you kill creatures, you get an amount of essence which caps out at 100% and then you can OFFER ESSENCE/OFFER ESSENCE TO SANCTIFY/OFFER ESSENCE TO DEFILE instead, and you would lose your essence when you die. We should make essence gain equal to your level vs the level of the denizen so everyone can be involved instead of just high end people.

Mishgul

I'm not sure why you posted that post, like did you just argue that you weren't going to argue therefore you are not going to argue except you argued? Like how is this relevant to the current argument?

Khairt

I think I should be able to carry corpses in my veil. Perhaps with a stasis effect.

Mathonwy

Wait, you bought two artefact pets expressly to participate in a type conflict that you don't think is fun, deem unnecessary to the game, and which you would glady see go away completely?

Buckawns isn't meta at all. It doesn't completely disable hindering, just free hindering to which any level 10 adventurer (you have to be level 10 to pk now right?) has access. If you give corpses to an invincible pet, there is absolute zero way you can stop them from being used again unless you just incessantly PK the person who owns the pet until corpses decay, which is gonna get you shrubbed so fast. It's also pretty expressly stated what buckawns does, and is balanced around its one explicit use.

ETA: you also have veils to get around veils. Nothing gets around pets.

ETA 2: doesn't veil deliver have like a 3 or 4 second eq?

Strata

Mathonwy said:

Wait, you bought two artefact pets expressly to participate in a type conflict that you don't think is fun, deem unnecessary to the game, and which you would glady see go away completely?

Buckawns isn't meta at all. It doesn't completely disable hindering, just free hindering to which any level 10 adventurer (you have to be level 10 to pk now right?) has access. If you give corpses to an invincible pet, there is absolute zero way you can stop them from being used again unless you just incessantly PK the person who owns the pet until corpses decay, which is gonna get you shrubbed so fast. It's also pretty expressly stated what buckawns does, and is balanced around its one explicit use.

ETA: you also have veils to get around veils. Nothing gets around pets.

Totally agree with this. Hence my usage of "neener neener".

Alrena

 I used my pet to deny the enemy from defiling by grabbing 100+ fire elementals and stuffing them in my wyvern. They were later just offered, but it mostly meant we wouldn't lose 7 shrines. 

You could just limit the amount of how much a pet can carry, that seems the simplest solution. 20 items or so. I sometimes use the pet to hold extra moss that I can't inrift, just in case I get ganked! I do like the feature for that reason.

tl;dr just limit how many things a pet can carry.

Strata

Another representative of the Neener Neener Club has spoken.

Alrena

Strata said:

Another representative of the Neener Neener Club has spoken.

At least I tried to be constructive! Neener, neener!

Tesha

I honestly don't see what the big deal is. If we don't want you to get our corpses, you won't get our corpses. This is the case whether we use pets, packs, suicide mice, or sacrificial knives. There are far greater examples of metagaming that have far greater impacts on the game than pets holding corpses. Like earrings. I'm surprised you guys are this agitated about it.

Florentino

Antonius said:

While we're discussing this, here's a short list of other things you can do to preserve corpses even if you die/lose the fight:

• Drop corpses in a subdivision house
• Hand off corpses to somebody who remains in the city
• Drop corpses on a ship

Clearly the solution is to prevent people from using the DROP and GIVE commands with (NPC) corpses entirely.

What an awful argument. There's a clear difference - when you leave corpses in the city or a safe spot, you're basically faced with a tradeoff and making a decision to be risk-averse - less likelihood of essence loss to the enemy but also less flexibility in the shrine battle (i.e. maybe you don't have enough to defile completely because you overestimated essence worth or because someone sanctifies with a few unsidhe during the fight). Invincible pets completely eliminate the tradeoff, giving you huge additional flexibility.

Strata

I just think it's funny that people go to such extents to defend these meta-things that they completely fail to look at the bigger picture rationally and ask themselves "Is this really good for an enjoyable playing environment for everyone?" Instead - "There are far greater examples of metagaming that have far greater impacts ..." - yes everyone knows those are the only things some people are capable of. Neener neener! :P

Antonius

Florentino said:

Antonius said:

While we're discussing this, here's a short list of other things you can do to preserve corpses even if you die/lose the fight:

• Drop corpses in a subdivision house
• Hand off corpses to somebody who remains in the city
• Drop corpses on a ship

Clearly the solution is to prevent people from using the DROP and GIVE commands with (NPC) corpses entirely.

What an awful argument. There's a clear difference - when you leave corpses in the city or a safe spot, you're basically faced with a tradeoff and making a decision to be risk-averse - less likelihood of essence loss to the enemy but also less flexibility in the shrine battle (i.e. maybe you don't have enough to defile completely because you overestimated essence worth or because someone sanctifies with a few unsidhe during the fight). Invincible pets completely eliminate the tradeoff, giving you huge additional flexibility.

So the problem isn't just that you can avoid losing your corpses (which is what your original post stated was precisely the problem), but that you can do that without having some (in my opinion trivially overcome) downsides?

Also, just to make this clear, that wasn't an argument against your idea, nor am I defending being able to use pets to keep hold of corpses; I like having the option to keep my essence while hunting even if I get ganked, but I'm not going to care if it gets taken away. My point was that there are other, almost as effective, ways of achieving the same end goal (not losing all of your corpses if you go to defile and end up losing the fight that follows), and if we're going to bother to make changes we may as well address them all. Unless you disagree that they're also a problem, and think it's just pets because they're slightly more convenient, in which case we'll just have to disagree.

Mathonwy

Tesha said:

I honestly don't see what the big deal is. If we don't want you to get our corpses, you won't get our corpses. This is the case whether we use pets, packs, suicide mice, or sacrificial knives. There are far greater examples of metagaming that have far greater impacts on the game than pets holding corpses. Like earrings. I'm surprised you guys are this agitated about it.

Whether or not earrings are imbalanced doesn't have any bearing on whether or not artefact pets being used as invincible containers for indefinite corpse storage is imbalanced-- and as I've said before, there are ways (maybe not enough ways, but still ways) to get around earrings. There isn't with pets.

I don't know if keeping corpses in packs stops them from dropping when you die (I don't think that's the case and if it is it shouldn't be) or if you can use suicide mice in the same way that you use artefact pets. I do know that if you use a sacrificial knife to offer the corpses, it means you can't use them to sanctify or defile, which is a perfectly fair trade-off.

Also, while it's certainly honest, "If we don't want you to get our corpses, you won't get our corpses" is a terrible attitude and even worse reason to justify keeping this in the game.

And yes, @Antonius, the issue is that it completely eliminates risk from the risk/reward equation. Sure you can store corpses on a ship or in a subdivision house, but if they're there, they're not being used to sanctify or defile. If/when you are using them to sanctify or defile out of your inventory (and not your pet's) then, hey, no problem, appropriate risk introduced.

Aepas

I'm gonna come back and say it, if you bought a pet solely for the purpose of holding corpses, you're a fool.

If you think using corpses as bait containers is a good idea, you're a fool.

This argument is stupid, stop trying to defend metagame.

Jarrod

Dropping corpses anywhere has counterplay. If you know someone is returning multiple times to defile, you can use the writs or RP reasoning to jump them in-transit and get whatever corpses they're holding. If you know where they're going you can follow them and grab the corpses from behind them when they go to defile.

If someone else is holding them on guardstack, you can kill them and grab corpses.

Methods that involve counterplay, even if it's difficult, are infinitely better than methods without them, aka invincible pets.

Mithridates

Why the fuck is this even that big of a deal, honestly?

Jarrod

Mechanically one-sided conflict sucks.

Mithridates

It's not one-sided.  You all can do the same thing. 

Nellaundra

Just like veils aren't a terrible mechanic because everyone can technically do the same thing. I'm not going to blow hundreds of dollars for some minor mechanical benefit. It's the definition of pay2win, and pretty much just bullshit.

Jovolo

That doesn't make it not one-sided.

Jovolo

Nellaundra said:

Just like veils aren't a terrible mechanic because everyone can technically do the same thing. I'm not going to blow hundreds of dollars for some minor mechanical benefit. It's the definition of pay2win, and pretty much just bullshit.

Veils are different because they aren't innately one-sided. A person can pay for the protection of a veil yes, but another can equally pay for the perk to bypass that protection. It would be a fairer comparison if veils were simply impenetrable altogether, but they aren't.

Kyrra

Shrouds are available quite readily to balance out veils.

There's nothing to balance out invincible pets, especially those purely bought to unbalance the game.

I'm not surprised it's the Targloosis crowd that can't comprehend why it's unbalanced and should be changed. The arguments so far are exactly the same as the ones from the most recent event. Just because you can do something, doesn't make it right or that you should. The fact there's no comprehension of this is just plain sad.

Mithridates

Jovolo said:

That doesn't make it not one-sided.

What the fuck do you mean?  The fact that anyone can do it, not just ONE SIDE of a conflict, means it's not one-sided.  I don't get your logic with this one.  

Shirszae

He means one-sided (I think) in that once the pet has the corpses, there is absolutely nothing you can do to get those corpses. Even if you have yourself a pet, it won't change the matter that the corpses are inaccessible to you. Even after you killed the owner.

Veils are theoretically different. If you buy a veil, you are on even grounds with the veiled. But thats not the case here. Unless they make it so pets can steal other pet's corpses. Which would be interesting.

Alrena

Shirszae said:

He means one-sided (I think) in that once the pet has the corpses, there is absolutely nothing you can do to get those corpses. Even if you have yourself a pet, it won't change the matter that the corpses are inaccessible to you. Even after you killed the owner.

Veils are theoretically different. If you buy a veil, you are on even grounds with the veiled. But thats not the case here. Unless they make it so pets can steal other pet's corpses. Which would be interesting.

Clearly the solution is for pets to be able to fight each other, the loser drops all items held.

Jovolo

Yes

http://forums.achaea.com/discussion/2396/mortality#latest

Florentino

Azaiza, a daemonic wyvern uses Hydro Pump!

It's super-effective!