What Happened To You Today?

Kresslack

Yeah, stuff like that makes sense and I don't mind. We used to do a lot of that in the Naga with backstab squads just to assassinate one person when they thought they were safe inside a city, and would immediately leave after.

More talking about one person entering a city and picking off random city NPC's "just because". Gets annoying to have constantly keep dropping what is going on to chase that one person around, who sometimes even more frustratingly can manage to just keep doing it by utilizing things like ice and ice walls to hinder or split up people trying to respond.

On that note, does ice effect Evade at all? I've noticed it affects things like Leap and Mountjump.

Kiet

Kresslack said:

I really wish a lot of the solo or two people "raid" attempts would let up. Most of the time it leads to no worthwhile conflict, and more often than not it just interrupts RP, which can be really frustrating when it keeps happening as a result of one or two people being bored and just wanting to stir something up. If you're going to attack/raid a city, make it an actual attack and have a better reason than being bored or being a general nuisance.

You're like completely missing the mindset of a lot of pvpers if you believe this. If it were possible, I'm sure that at least like 75% of the most prolific raiders would never bring more than 3 people to raid, the only reason they bring more is because they're forced to by circumstances (ie: there's too many enemies to reasonably beat without help)

Kresslack

Kiet said:

Kresslack said:

I really wish a lot of the solo or two people "raid" attempts would let up. Most of the time it leads to no worthwhile conflict, and more often than not it just interrupts RP, which can be really frustrating when it keeps happening as a result of one or two people being bored and just wanting to stir something up. If you're going to attack/raid a city, make it an actual attack and have a better reason than being bored or being a general nuisance.

You're like completely missing the mindset of a lot of pvpers if you believe this. If it were possible, I'm sure that at least like 75% of the most prolific raiders would never bring more than 3 people to raid, the only reason they bring more is because they're forced to by circumstances (ie: there's too many enemies to reasonably beat without help)

I don't think that I'm missing the mindset of a lot of pvpers so much as a lot of pvpers might have the wrong mindset. There's a significant difference (or there should be, in my opinion) between an individual infiltrating a city to eliminate a specific target, for a specific reason, and an individual infiltrating a city to essentially combat it themselves or with one or two other people.

Raids are meant to be purposeful engagements that encourage more people to get involved, not exclude them. Which is why I don't think that the 'solo-raid' method makes very much sense. Nor is it very effective at being little more than a nuisance generally.

Telendrieth

Farrah said:

Kresslack said:

I really wish a lot of the solo or two people "raid" attempts would let up. Most of the time it leads to no worthwhile conflict, and more often than not it just interrupts RP, which can be really frustrating when it keeps happening as a result of one or two people being bored and just wanting to stir something up. If you're going to attack/raid a city, make it an actual attack and have a better reason than being bored or being a general nuisance.

I can't speak for everyone, but in a lot of circumstances those are not people being "bored" or "trying to stir things up" so much as they are someone hiding in the city who provoked them in some way. For example, some of us went after Esti when she broke oaths and she immediately hid in Cyrene. Now that we're all enemied to Cyrene already for unrelated reasons, we're not going to just let someone be because they're in Cyrene. We're going to go in Cyrene after them. But since it's just one person we're after, we will likely go in small groups first.

Another occasion, I ended up soloing Cyrene for a bit because Cyrenians ganked me in Eleusis and then went to Cyrene. I assume others might have similar reasons! Though, I obviously can't say for certain. My response to anyone mad about me being a nuisance to people who ganked me is that being ganked is a nuisance to me too.

Was this when you were solo jumping into the senate meeting?

Kiet

Kresslack said:

Kiet said:

Kresslack said:

I really wish a lot of the solo or two people "raid" attempts would let up. Most of the time it leads to no worthwhile conflict, and more often than not it just interrupts RP, which can be really frustrating when it keeps happening as a result of one or two people being bored and just wanting to stir something up. If you're going to attack/raid a city, make it an actual attack and have a better reason than being bored or being a general nuisance.

You're like completely missing the mindset of a lot of pvpers if you believe this. If it were possible, I'm sure that at least like 75% of the most prolific raiders would never bring more than 3 people to raid, the only reason they bring more is because they're forced to by circumstances (ie: there's too many enemies to reasonably beat without help)

I don't think that I'm missing the mindset of a lot of pvpers so much as a lot of pvpers might have the wrong mindset. There's a significant difference (or there should be, in my opinion) between an individual infiltrating a city to eliminate a specific target, for a specific reason, and an individual infiltrating a city to essentially combat it themselves or with one or two other people.

Raids are meant to be purposeful engagements that encourage more people to get involved, not exclude them. Which is why I don't think that the 'solo-raid' method makes very much sense. Nor is it very effective at being little more than a nuisance generally.

What exactly is the issue with people trying to fight on more challenging terms? Would you rather get steamrolled by the 20 person cwho every time? Because from my experience, no one prefers that.

When people solo/duo raid they're rarely excluding people. There's times of the day when there's just not a whole lot of people to raid with, or people are busy, etc. If there's a lot of raiders about then obv they'll go raid somewhere harder.

Basically: who are you to tell people they're raiding wrong, particularly for making it easier for the defenders rather than harder?

Kresslack

I'm not telling anyone they're raiding wrong. I'm expressing an opinion: Raiding as an individual isn't actually raiding. It generally seems more like trolling. This is specifically why a raid mechanic revolving around sanctions and needing tanks was implemented. I understand it's not an opinion you agree with, and I have no issue with that. It is however supported by a lot of such instances, specifically on behalf of yourself.

I'm simply curious as to what exactly is accomplished by sneaking into a city, killing city denizens, and then running when people respond? If the goal isn't to draw people into an engagement that leads to a sanctioned raid, then what is it, exactly?

Shirszae

Hoping to kill individual people before the masses arrive or hoping someone will chase out to kill them

Jiraishin

Kresslack said:

Yeah, stuff like that makes sense and I don't mind. We used to do a lot of that in the Naga with backstab squads just to assassinate one person when they thought they were safe inside a city, and would immediately leave after.

Them were the days.

No, ice does not affect evade. Evade basically acts less like 'movement' than sort of changing your room position by one without anything intervening. That's why you could, for example, evade one room into TT controlled Cyrene as long as you stood entirely still. As soon as you entered any command at all you got kicked to the Cave.

Kiet

Kresslack said:

I'm not telling anyone they're raiding wrong. I'm expressing an opinion: Raiding as an individual isn't actually raiding. It generally seems more like trolling. This is specifically why a raid mechanic revolving around sanctions and needing tanks was implemented. I understand it's not an opinion you agree with, and I have no issue with that. It is however supported by a lot of such instances, specifically on behalf of yourself.

I'm simply curious as to what exactly is accomplished by sneaking into a city, killing city denizens, and then running when people respond? If the goal isn't to draw people into an engagement that leads to a sanctioned raid, then what is it, exactly?

Because most people don't leave when people respond? Some people did (bleak), but when for instance Iaki/Puxi/Khel and I have duo raided, we either pk people or got pk, that was the point. Sometimes we get absolutely destroyed, sometimes we manage to pk a lot of people in a row despite absurd odds. The game encourages pk, and defenders can choose not to engage, so what is 'accomplished' is simply people having fun fighting, which is more than enough. It also, in some cases, provokes a response from said city, which is literally how wars have started in the past.

Kresslack

Kiet said:

Kresslack said:

I'm not telling anyone they're raiding wrong. I'm expressing an opinion: Raiding as an individual isn't actually raiding. It generally seems more like trolling. This is specifically why a raid mechanic revolving around sanctions and needing tanks was implemented. I understand it's not an opinion you agree with, and I have no issue with that. It is however supported by a lot of such instances, specifically on behalf of yourself.

I'm simply curious as to what exactly is accomplished by sneaking into a city, killing city denizens, and then running when people respond? If the goal isn't to draw people into an engagement that leads to a sanctioned raid, then what is it, exactly?

The game encourages pk, and defenders can choose not to engage, so what is 'accomplished' is simply people having fun fighting, which is more than enough.

The part I disagree with is PK simply for the sake of PK. The game encourages PK with justifiable role-play reason. There are already a lot of areas in the game that allow PK simply for the sake of PK. I'm simply of the mindset that cities shouldn't be one of them. Raids are fun, but they're also driven by RP which leads to further, significant conflicts supported by RP.

Kiet

Kresslack said:

The part I disagree with is PK simply for the sake of PK. The game encourages PK with justifiable role-play reason. There are already a lot of areas in the game that allow PK simply for the sake of PK. I'm simply of the mindset that cities shouldn't be one of them. Raids are fun, but they're also driven by RP which leads to further, significant conflicts supported by RP.

the secret is that if people only pk'd when it was 'justifiable' pk in the sense of most pacifist types' view of it, no one would be actually good at pk because there'd be no opportunity to practice.

nothing about bringing 20 people makes pk more rp than bringing 2, I'm sorry to say. Characters are characters regardless of whether they are in a big or small group.

Do you know what happened when we brought 5 people to raid? Half the defenders qq'd, lol.

Taryius

I'd argue that is small raid and skirmishes are way healthier for the RP of PK than anything else, because there is a reason. Its way more organic than "market seeking duels" or ganking someone in Annwyn only to never interact with them after.

Jinos

I think the problem is that defenders have no idea what the invaders intentions are. So, everyone gathers, ignores, or rushes expecting bait for a full raid party to ensue.

Which counteracts small scale skirmishes the antagonists want to get into, because a city generally responds with full force if they're able to by default.

I think there were a few ideas in a thread that wanted to expand on different kind of raids. Large scale and small. Without a system in place though it's up to the players to engage at their discretion.

If people felt like organising a small composition of fighters, and told the rest of us to stand down and keep watch. I'd be up for that. Would definitely ramp up the tension. 

Kresslack

Kiet said:

Kresslack said:

The part I disagree with is PK simply for the sake of PK. The game encourages PK with justifiable role-play reason. There are already a lot of areas in the game that allow PK simply for the sake of PK. I'm simply of the mindset that cities shouldn't be one of them. Raids are fun, but they're also driven by RP which leads to further, significant conflicts supported by RP.

the secret is that if people only pk'd when it was 'justifiable' pk in the sense of most pacifist types' view of it, no one would be actually good at pk because there'd be no opportunity to practice.

nothing about bringing 20 people makes pk more rp than bringing 2, I'm sorry to say. Characters are characters regardless of whether they are in a big or small group.

Do you know what happened when we brought 5 people to raid? Half the defenders qq'd, lol.

You're misunderstanding what I was saying, I think. Nothing said it had to be justifiable; there are going to be many instances where justifiable is a subjective matter where one person may see it as justifiable but the other may not.

What was stated was there should be a justifiable role-play reason for such things, which is a more objective approach.

In regards to how many people are brought, this is very much a matter of the situation. If you're entering a city with the intent to kill or cause harm, especially if you're already enemied to that city, there should be the expectation of overwhelming odds. The scenario and location make it such, and is supported by the RP of it being a city with a lot of guards and citizens who wish to defend it.

This would be significantly different compared to the old style gank squads that used to float around outside of cities picking people off post-raid, compared to an individual tracking down another individual in retaliation or to complete a bounty. These are much better, rp-supported methods and avenues of approach to promoting sustainable and enjoyable PK.

I see the many times Tirac sat at NoNT and accepting duels just so he could practice, while also asserting his martial prowess, as a great example of all involved getting an opportunity to get better at PK while also making it about the RP.

I've also never personally witnessed any such instance of Cyrene's defenders just up and quitting during a raid defense, so not sure what point you were trying to make there.

Kiet

Kresslack said:

Kiet said:

Kresslack said:

The part I disagree with is PK simply for the sake of PK. The game encourages PK with justifiable role-play reason. There are already a lot of areas in the game that allow PK simply for the sake of PK. I'm simply of the mindset that cities shouldn't be one of them. Raids are fun, but they're also driven by RP which leads to further, significant conflicts supported by RP.

the secret is that if people only pk'd when it was 'justifiable' pk in the sense of most pacifist types' view of it, no one would be actually good at pk because there'd be no opportunity to practice.

nothing about bringing 20 people makes pk more rp than bringing 2, I'm sorry to say. Characters are characters regardless of whether they are in a big or small group.

Do you know what happened when we brought 5 people to raid? Half the defenders qq'd, lol.

You're misunderstanding what I was saying, I think. Nothing said it had to be justifiable; there are going to be many instances where justifiable is a subjective matter where one person may see it as justifiable but the other may not.

What was stated was there should be a justifiable role-play reason for such things, which is a more objective approach.

In regards to how many people are brought, this is very much a matter of the situation. If you're entering a city with the intent to kill or cause harm, especially if you're already enemied to that city, there should be the expectation of overwhelming odds. The scenario and location make it such, and is supported by the RP of it being a city with a lot of guards and citizens who wish to defend it.

This would be significantly different compared to the old style gank squads that used to float around outside of cities picking people off post-raid, compared to an individual tracking down another individual in retaliation or to complete a bounty. These are much better, rp-supported methods and avenues of approach to promoting sustainable and enjoyable PK.

I've also never personally witnessed any such instance of Cyrene's defenders just up and quitting during a raid defense, so not sure what point you were trying to make there.

Literally 50% of Mhaldor's higher CR members can probably tell you IC why Kiet is hitting Cyrene lately (not that they necessarily will, but the point is if there's no role-play reason, why do people in Mhaldor know a role-play reason?).  There is no reason why a 1-3 person party is any less 'roleplay' than a 20 person one. The reality is that most cities, at most hours of the day, don't need big groups to be defeated. A lot of pkers will see this and scale back on the group even more so it's an actual challenge.

That you've 'never personally witnessed' this instance doesn't take away from it literally happening today. Your personal experiences or lack thereof do not create an objective reality on their own, and this happens all the time.

The reality is that if you roll into cities with a group of 5 or more high-ish level fighters, the odds of the defending city responding at all drops dramatically. When we bring less people, it's to encourage a response at all. It's not because we don't 'expect' an overwhelming response, it's that we hope there's any sort of response, and overwhelming is fine, because even overwhelming can be beaten.

When you're being raided with less than five people, it's to give you odds of actually winning, or odds that you feel like you can win with. That you'd complain about this is bizarre.

ps: Tirac was a fucking maldaathi of course he was going to duel. not every character cares about dueling.

Kresslack

Taryius said:

I'd argue that is small raid and skirmishes are way healthier for the RP of PK than anything else, because there is a reason. Its way more organic than "market seeking duels" or ganking someone in Annwyn only to never interact with them after.

I don't disagree with this at all. My point was specifically in regards to one person trying to do this against an entire city, as I don't see how there's anything really RP driven about it.

Kiet

Kresslack said:

Taryius said:

I'd argue that is small raid and skirmishes are way healthier for the RP of PK than anything else, because there is a reason. Its way more organic than "market seeking duels" or ganking someone in Annwyn only to never interact with them after.

I don't disagree with this at all. My point was specifically in regards to one person trying to do this against an entire city, as I don't see how there's anything really RP driven about it.

Again, people in-game know the RP reason for it, lol. Also you act like this 'one person' is just hitting denizens then dying/leaving, when in fact this one person is killing anywhere from a few to several Cyrenians regularly during these engagements.

Similarly, Khel and I sanctioned with just us two this week, and many times in the past these small groups of 2-3 have repeatedly sanctioned and sometimes even tanked.

Taryius

I never thought I'd hear someone say "If you're going to raid do so with overwhelming odds" unsarcastically.

Kresslack

Kiet said:

Kresslack said:

Kiet said:

Kresslack said:

The part I disagree with is PK simply for the sake of PK. The game encourages PK with justifiable role-play reason. There are already a lot of areas in the game that allow PK simply for the sake of PK. I'm simply of the mindset that cities shouldn't be one of them. Raids are fun, but they're also driven by RP which leads to further, significant conflicts supported by RP.

the secret is that if people only pk'd when it was 'justifiable' pk in the sense of most pacifist types' view of it, no one would be actually good at pk because there'd be no opportunity to practice.

nothing about bringing 20 people makes pk more rp than bringing 2, I'm sorry to say. Characters are characters regardless of whether they are in a big or small group.

Do you know what happened when we brought 5 people to raid? Half the defenders qq'd, lol.

You're misunderstanding what I was saying, I think. Nothing said it had to be justifiable; there are going to be many instances where justifiable is a subjective matter where one person may see it as justifiable but the other may not.

What was stated was there should be a justifiable role-play reason for such things, which is a more objective approach.

In regards to how many people are brought, this is very much a matter of the situation. If you're entering a city with the intent to kill or cause harm, especially if you're already enemied to that city, there should be the expectation of overwhelming odds. The scenario and location make it such, and is supported by the RP of it being a city with a lot of guards and citizens who wish to defend it.

This would be significantly different compared to the old style gank squads that used to float around outside of cities picking people off post-raid, compared to an individual tracking down another individual in retaliation or to complete a bounty. These are much better, rp-supported methods and avenues of approach to promoting sustainable and enjoyable PK.

I've also never personally witnessed any such instance of Cyrene's defenders just up and quitting during a raid defense, so not sure what point you were trying to make there.

Literally 50% of Mhaldor's higher CR members can probably tell you IC why Kiet is hitting Cyrene lately (not that they necessarily will, but the point is if there's no role-play reason, why do people in Mhaldor know a role-play reason?).  There is no reason why a 1-3 person party is any less 'roleplay' than a 20 person one. The reality is that most cities, at most hours of the day, don't need big groups to be defeated. A lot of pkers will see this and scale back on the group even more so it's an actual challenge.

That you've 'never personally witnessed' this instance doesn't take away from it literally happening today. Your personal experiences or lack thereof do not create an objective reality on their own, and this happens all the time.

The reality is that if you roll into cities with a group of 5 or more high-ish level fighters, the odds of the defending city responding at all drops dramatically. When we bring less people, it's to encourage a response at all. It's not because we don't 'expect' an overwhelming response, it's that we hope there's any sort of response, and overwhelming is fine, because even overwhelming can be beaten.

When you're being raided with less than five people, it's to give you odds of actually winning, or odds that you feel like you can win with. That you'd complain about this is bizarre.

Again, that's entirely not the point I was making. I have absolutely no issue with small raid groups and issues. I'm specifically saying the instances of one person trying to take on an entire city is a bit of a ridiculous notion. If they have a reason to be attacking that city, it seems they would opt to be part of such group attempts as a way of exacting their actions, rather than the 'me vs the world' approach.

I also never said that the instance of people leaving during a raid never happens, or that my never seeing it happen changed anything. I'm sure there are various reasons people have to qq during a raid. I simply said in all the raid defences I've participated in, I've never seen it happen. If your point was to say when faced with experienced fighters, Cyrene will disperse more often than fight, that is certainly not the case, as has been seen countless times already.

The only thing I'm arguing here is that I think it's ridiculous for one person to try to take on a city alone (i.e. solo raid). It doesn't make much sense from an RP perspective. That's literally it.

Kiet

It would be ridiculous if the solo person wasn't consistently getting more kills than the defenders, sure. If the solo person is killing more defenders than the defenders are killing them, then ... mission accomplished, my dude.

Also you obviously don't raid often if you seriously believe that bringing more people doesn't discourage defence. This isn't a Cyrene thing (Cyrene is one of the best at not getting discouraged too quickly), it's a general thing.

Jiraishin

Kresslack said:

Kiet said:

Kresslack said:

The part I disagree with is PK simply for the sake of PK. The game encourages PK with justifiable role-play reason. There are already a lot of areas in the game that allow PK simply for the sake of PK. I'm simply of the mindset that cities shouldn't be one of them. Raids are fun, but they're also driven by RP which leads to further, significant conflicts supported by RP.

the secret is that if people only pk'd when it was 'justifiable' pk in the sense of most pacifist types' view of it, no one would be actually good at pk because there'd be no opportunity to practice.

nothing about bringing 20 people makes pk more rp than bringing 2, I'm sorry to say. Characters are characters regardless of whether they are in a big or small group.

Do you know what happened when we brought 5 people to raid? Half the defenders qq'd, lol.

You're misunderstanding what I was saying, I think. Nothing said it had to be justifiable; there are going to be many instances where justifiable is a subjective matter where one person may see it as justifiable but the other may not.

What was stated was there should be a justifiable role-play reason for such things, which is a more objective approach.

In regards to how many people are brought, this is very much a matter of the situation. If you're entering a city with the intent to kill or cause harm, especially if you're already enemied to that city, there should be the expectation of overwhelming odds. The scenario and location make it such, and is supported by the RP of it being a city with a lot of guards and citizens who wish to defend it.

This would be significantly different compared to the old style gank squads that used to float around outside of cities picking people off post-raid, compared to an individual tracking down another individual in retaliation or to complete a bounty. These are much better, rp-supported methods and avenues of approach to promoting sustainable and enjoyable PK.

I see the many times Tirac sat at NoNT and accepting duels just so he could practice, while also asserting his martial prowess, as a great example of all involved getting an opportunity to get better at PK while also making it about the RP.

I've also never personally witnessed any such instance of Cyrene's defenders just up and quitting during a raid defense, so not sure what point you were trying to make there.

I'd like to make two points in response to yours.

Firstly, people who enter enemy cities and run around them being annoying already have to dodge guarded rooms, etc. So there's already an IG representation of 'overwhelming odds'. They're presumably being strategic about not getting cornered by patrols. I don't think that's unfair, or [by Achaea standards] unrealistic.

Secondly, the idea of sneaking into enemy territory alone or in small groups and picking fights as Saturday night entertainment does have RL historical basis... and would have been called raiding. So I don't think doing that IG is somehow bad RP. The only improvement it could use is a way for the PKers to steal cattle and serfs and torch the thatch on their way out.

Kresslack

Taryius said:

I never thought I'd hear someone say "If you're going to raid do so with overwhelming odds" unsarcastically.

Kresslack said:

Taryius said:

I'd argue that is small raid and skirmishes are way healthier for the RP of PK than anything else, because there is a reason. Its way more organic than "market seeking duels" or ganking someone in Annwyn only to never interact with them after.

I don't disagree with this at all. My point was specifically in regards to one person trying to do this against an entire city, as I don't see how there's anything really RP driven about it.

I can see the entire point is lost on more than just Kiet, making this a moot discussion, so I'll just drop it and agreed to disagree. Carry on!

Kiet

You're choosing to ignore the fact that 1 person, 2 people, or 3 people as the specifics is irrelevant if the outnumbered group is succeeding in their mission, lol.

Kresslack

Kiet said:

It would be ridiculous if the solo person wasn't consistently getting more kills than the defenders, sure. If the solo person is killing more defenders than the defenders are killing them, then ... mission accomplished, my dude.

Also you obviously don't raid often if you seriously believe that bringing more people doesn't discourage defence. This isn't a Cyrene thing (Cyrene is one of the best at not getting discouraged too quickly), it's a general thing.

When put into that context, I completely see where you're coming from. I still don't really agree with it, strictly from an RP standpoint, but I can at least understand it.

I don't raid at all these days really, but I jump into defenses as much as I can. I know that numbers are a significant factor, especially in regards to morale.

Sorry if I misunderstood what you were trying to convey, and I think a lot of it just got lost in the interpretation of the tone more than anything.

Kiet said:

You're choosing to ignore the fact that 1 person, 2 people, or 3 people as the specifics is irrelevant if the outnumbered group is succeeding in their mission, lol.

I wasn't ignoring the fact that technically 1 person can kill multiple people while in a hostile city. I was simply trying to say that, from an RP standpoint (regardless of personal character reasons for vengeance, etc) it doesn't make much sense to me. Kind of like the old seafaring days of one in a Windcutter being able to board and effectively take out a Strider simply because the person in the Windcutter was a better fighter rather than a better sailor.

Kiet

I'm not mad at you, I just don't understand why you disagree from an RP standpoint. Like Jiraishin pointed out, small groups raiding larger encampments is a historically common occurrence in the real world. In Achaea, one of Evil's important books literally has stories glorifying the lone warrior murdering entire villages. Stories like Robin Hood are about how few people take on much bigger organizations. Even Western stories have the evil guy that challenges an entire town to take him on.

It's a common trope in game, in fiction, and in real life, with real life only suffering from single people not being able to do superhuman things, so it's usually small groups instead.

In Achaea, combat IS tied to role-play. You can't role-play being a badass warrior if you can't fight. That also means that if you can fight well (or better than your opponents), you can be a much more powerful character than a realistic world would allow. This is a world where gods exist, where many historical characters like Lucaine could take on dozens of people unarmed. So why is an adventurer being able to take on a handful of people, especially when they have abilities that make them, ICly, basically perfect spies and infiltrators, unusual?

Jiraishin

Lone warriors slipping into the enemy camp, murdering one or two people in the night and then running like hell before the newly roused defenders catch up is also a time-honoured tradition even without superhuman powers.

As is failing to dodge said defenders and dying painfully.

Kiet

Or evading into guards by accident.

Kresslack

That's the distinction I was trying to focus on: small groups vs an individual. Small raiding parties, both historically and in the sense of Achaea, are effective when used right, especially when utilizing guerilla tactics.

Lenn

There have been stories of actual people taking on large numbers all by themselves, particularly in more modern times.

Heck, it's practically the job description for being a sniper, understanding that you're not taking them all on at once or in their face, but some snipers can account for hundreds of kills over their career, sometimes only involving a single war.

Jiraishin

Kresslack said:

That's the distinction I was trying to focus on: small groups vs an individual. Small raiding parties, both historically and in the sense of Achaea, are effective when used right, especially when utilizing guerilla tactics.

IRL a lone sniper (for example) who positions themselves right can kill a lot of people in an urban environment. Still not seeing a problem.