Best Of

Players are viewing denizens as just existing in a "zone" so to speak like this is an MMORPG.

In Mysia, we pick up voyages, talk to people about killing a kraken, they pay out exorbitant amounts of gold for completing these tasks on the seas. We do numerous quests for gold, interacting with the population and even have honors quest lines, which exist to demonstrate their connection with other zones historically, up to and including perhaps embarassing yourself with three other friends for the amusement of a denizen there. (IM TRYING TO NOT SPOILER OR GIVE OUT INFORMATION)

We share a port with them, theres trade associated with harbors, these arent just exclamation points over their heads saying collect 15 bear asses for a reward. It needs to be viewed as interaction with a community.

In Dun Valley, it is a militaristic barony, overseen by a denizen who ....is frequently laid to rest for his inherent iron fist. We as players are recognized for his culling, and in part earn said recognition for doing so. There is also large game to hunt, curious happenings to unfold, quests and other things which again, are from a player standpoint an interaction with a community.

If people are so staunch about RP and consequences for actions which....I have seen numerous threads about.

Why is it so contradictory when those actions effect PVE, and that consequence effects all aspects of the game. You want the cake, you must eat some too.

I am probably going to be very unpopular for saying this, but some of the responses in these threads where people's conditions are being thrown about as pivot points ("I cannot PvP or I will become ill") make me feel held hostage a little bit.

Of course I have absolutely no desire to see anyone who plays Achaea end up sick or suffer for wanting to play it, and I am 100% certain that everybody reading this post feels the same way about it. But when things like this come to light, what else can it signal other than the notion that forcing these people in any way to engage beyond the limited realms they have available might possibly cause them, on the other end of the screen, to end up with actual bodily harm? I certainly don't want that at all!

The notion turns the act of playing the game into a constant source of new concern. Having read these testimonies, how can I now in good conscience attempt to engage with the Mark system knowing that if someone misses the initial warning that I could be potentially jumping someone who might end up hurt (or worse) in real life at all? How can I pivot towards engaging cities with substantial populations of people not directly engaged in combat and be confident there aren't similarly affected people that might suffer for it?

The fundamental underpinning of playing Achaea was (or at least, I thought was the case) that the general idea of engaging in a world highly prone to conflict (and with an array of classes with skills with which the vast, overwhelming majority of can only be used on players) was that players would inevitably clash and anyone continuing to engage with the game would be okay with that happening.

Now I am not so sure anymore, and the choice I am left with involves acquiescing to calls to dial back or limit changes that I don't fundamentally agree with from a narrative and gameplay perspective because of course I don't want to endorse or support anything that could see people physically hurt while trying to play with something they enjoy.

Over reacting on day 1 when there is little information about the new system available is okay.

Over reacting days later when information has addressed almost every concern is not.

Synthus - in general players can bash 99.99% of what you could before without any new consequences. You get a bright red warning when you attack a denizen that would put a contract out. You can then choose to not kill that denizen if you want.

This is a small change that isn't going to affect many people, and those that are affected have a very easy solution available.

This change enriches the world and makes it feel more real while having not having a real downside.

Thank you Makarios, Nicola, Ictinus, Rhianna, and any other admin/God role that was involved. This is a great addition.

No one is (or reasonably should be) thinking this change is going to change the direction of the game overnight, or in a week, or in a month. Obviously such adjustments will take time, especially when trying to deviate from the normal patterns set decades before. That doesn't mean that making small changes at a time to try to subtly change that direction is a bad thing. With as much as this is probably changing on the back end (I can only imagine) it's probably better and more preferable for them to introduce small and subtle changes like this and evaluate how they affect the environment before continuing, rather than throwing out some large and impactful update that attempts to drastically change things in a more hard lined fashion, which I'm sure people would have even bigger issues with.

There is nothing I've heard or experienced about this update that suddenly makes it to where Marks are out there going on killing sprees to the point where people are feeling griefed. If anything, the only real tricky part I can see is that a lot of these denizens are also the only ones that drop talisman pieces. So it's definitely creating a bit of pause where people need to consider if it's worth the risk, and considering what the change is aimed to do, I don't think that's a bad thing. You have to kill them multiple times, while actively getting warned that doing so may result in a contract, so it seems like a very easy thing to avoid if you want to and very player friendly.

This argument will literally never end. PK haters will always say this is dumb, PK partakers will always say this is smart. Let's find solutions, not just "I don't like this because X".

@Gurklukke

"Players are viewing denizens as just existing in a "zone" so to speak like this is an MMORPG."

Achaea is an MMORPG. It says so right on the home page. "A Text RPG MMO Game".

"Why is it so contradictory when those actions go against PVE, and that consequence effects all aspects of the game."

Because there are players that either do not wish to engage in PvP, or in my case, cannot engage in PvP, and this change impacts the game for us. It may be minor now because it "only affects a handful of denizens", but what about down the road? Will it instead mean that any denizen with any tie to an organization, like the mhuns with GoM, will have rights to hire on players?

We have made multiple suggestions to align the consequences of these actions to PvE consequences, but constantly we are told "It's no big deal, either ignore the mobs or just learn PVP" and to be honest, that's more disheartening than the change is. It feels dismissive of the impediments to gameplay we face, it feels dismissive of any personal effects that we otherwise try to work around to enjoy the game, and it feels dismissive of me as a player.

All the suggestions I've made in the thread so far have been simply to protect players that do not want to or cannot dive into PvP. I have not made any statement or stance along the lines of "get rid of PvP", because I don't want to ruin anyone's PvP fun, all I'm asking is that people be considerate of those of us that cannot engage in that playstyle and work with us to come up with a solution that works for everyone so that Achaea can become a better game for everyone.

I am a bit conflicted. On one hand, I like that there is more consequence for hunting sentients. And I won't lie, I like the idea of players being able to fulfill those contracts.

But it does also break the whole bit about bejng able to opt in or not on pk that was brought up in one of the earlier threads.

Maybe some metrics could be used to decide whether an offending player gets a denizen or player mark to hunt them down.

I don't know necessarily that letting random PvPers go murder PvErs because they killed the wrong mob is particularly compelling conflict, or roleplay.

It's not like this game's combat affords /any/ direct roleplay as part of it. That said, as has been pointed out multiple times, dying is effectively inconsequential, so provided this is fairly restricted, I can't imagine it having any real meaningful impact one way or the other.

If the game really wanted to drive conflict and gasp roleplay, there'd be something more meaningful than giving away a free PK ticket to people who are just bashing. And, hey, I assume this is an initial change ahead of some broader things happening - I guess we'll see.

If you don't want people to murder everything then stop lining their pockets with gold.

Also, denizens are not the same as adventurers in any aspect of the game...this faux outrage over their wellbeing is ridiculous every time it comes up.