Welcome to the Achaea Forums! Please be sure to read the Forum Rules.

PK Rules and Consequences

1234568

Comments

  • JulesJules Member Posts: 2,169 @ - Epic Achaean
    edited September 2014
    Ulrike said:
    I actually think XP loss right now is pretty fair, compared to when I last played. The first time I died since coming back, I was hella pissed at having to bash for 4 hours to get it back... and then I saw it was only a fraction of a percentage even though I prayed. Death now makes me cross, but not ragey. That's good.

    The example others have cited, Imperian, is maybe not a direction Achaea should go PK-wise. I really like that death still has consequences. It makes victory and defeat mean a little more.
    Imperian has other, far less crippling costs.  But more importantly, they have a pretty neat way of looking at things from their upper combatant tier.  As one player put it:  

    "You don't fear death because you're afraid of what happens when you die; you fear dying in embarrassing ways. This is why Khizan/Juran will fearlessly charge guards or enormous teams, and yet we will coordinate fights against Menoch and such with military precision. There is no shame in dying to the big side of a 9v4, but there is shame in losing a 3v3 to Menoch/Kryss/etc.

    This is my OOC view on the matter, but it's also Khizan's IC view on things, which is how he justifies battle plans like "We're going to go in there and kill guards until we die, then we're going to come back and do it again." Death is a temporary setback; war stories are forever".


    The reason XP loss is a problem is because most of us aren't good enough to not incur a net loss that will tend to increase over time - and we're not going to get "good enough" any time soon.  No XP loss would also mean that people like Dunn could raid Cyrene with impunity (which is great, but might have to be looked at if the costs and annoyance got to be too ridiculous).  That said, if the energy and skills of people like that were redirected towards other cool outlets (like a slightly different version of icons), it might not be a problem.  
  • IuneosIuneos Member Posts: 77 ✭✭✭ - Distinguished
    A lot of you guys need straws. 
    Alaskar
  • AntoniusAntonius Member Posts: 4,771 @@ - Legendary Achaean
    Nim said:
    Why do writs still exist?
    Because they're needed to keep the reaction to an event (defiling) proportional (a single death).

    The problem you have is that the mechanism to give Orders the means to seek retribution against an individual is coming into conflict with a number of individuals belief that an attack on their God's shrine that they defend against gives them personal roleplay justification to kill that person.

    That's a perfectly reasonable and logical position to hold, but something obviously needs to be done about that conflict. I don't believe removing Writs is the way to go, otherwise you end up in a situation where every member of an Order potentially thinks they have sufficient reason to go out and kill a defiler, and a single action (defiling) suddenly leads to a totally disproportionate response (a number of deaths).

    It might be better if Writs went directly to the Order (rather than to the individual who witnessed), granted sufficient roleplay justification to all members of the Order to attack that target until they're fulfilled or contracted out, and were fulfilled when any member of the Order killed that person. So if four members of an Order respond to a defilement, member A witnesses and member B gets the kill (though in reality all four people were involved in killing whoever defiled), the situation is handled. You won't both get killed by members of the Order at the time of defiling, then potentially have to deal with a Writ later on.
    NimBluefAktillumAnedhel
  • SantarSantar Member Posts: 2,382 @@ - Legendary Achaean
    Claiming that defiling results in an unlimited amount of people attacking a person isn't exactly true.

    There are very few people the generally go out and actively hunt people. Not that many per city.

    image

    Ernam
  • AntoniusAntonius Member Posts: 4,771 @@ - Legendary Achaean
    Bukariin said:
    After much dwelling on the topic, I think what needs to be added is a HELP file describing Reasonable Expectation of Warning.  It would resolve a lot of the confusion that culminates in issues and/or illegal hiring and/or frustration by non-combatants or casual combatants.
    CITY RELATIONS is a thing that exists, and I recall both Blackrock and Enverren having signs warning that they're under the protection of Mhaldor on the way in. Maybe these need more attention brought to them, but I don't agree that a citizen of Mhaldor should have to warn anybody (or worse, check to see if they've previously been warned) who is caught hunting in those areas before they're allowed to kill them.

    The obligation for making sure you're not ignorant about the consequences of your actions rests with you, not anybody else.
    SilasAnedhel
  • JacenJacen Member Posts: 2,304 @@ - Legendary Achaean
    @Antonius I agree with your assessment, but then you also have to consider the flip side of the coin. If you accept a city bounty on me and get a mark contract to kill me for doing whatever (not defiling) and then your order has a writ on me for defiling, then mechanically, killing me once resolves all three of those conflicts, but I really should be up for 3 deaths. How would you resolve those types of situations?
    image
  • JovoloJovolo EnglandMember Posts: 3,162 @@ - Legendary Achaean
    Killing you three times
    JhuiAnedhel
  • AntoniusAntonius Member Posts: 4,771 @@ - Legendary Achaean
    @Jacen: Resolve in the order of bounty, contract, writ or contract, bounty, writ for each kill; I'm not really familiar with exactly how bounties work so don't know whether contracts or bounties should be considered more important. Basically every time I kill you, one of the things gets completed, not all three on the first kill. I'd be surprised if that wasn't how it already worked.

    @Santar: If that's a response to my post, I didn't claim that, I just said that it's a potential consequence of such a change. Besides, it only takes a few people per city to go out hunting somebody for defiling a shrine a single time for the punishment to start being unnecessary considering the severity of the crime.
  • JhuiJhui Member Posts: 1,958 @@ - Legendary Achaean
    Jacen said:
    @Antonius I agree with your assessment, but then you also have to consider the flip side of the coin. If you accept a city bounty on me and get a mark contract to kill me for doing whatever (not defiling) and then your order has a writ on me for defiling, then mechanically, killing me once resolves all three of those conflicts, but I really should be up for 3 deaths. How would you resolve those types of situations?
    assuming you don't get teamed by those 3 people, isn't this exactly the sort of conflict you're looking for when defiling?  Or are you just assuming you suck and cannot beat anyone, in which case what exactly are you looking for by defiling?


    image
  • IuneosIuneos Member Posts: 77 ✭✭✭ - Distinguished
    It seems to me that you want to do whatever you feel like without having to deal with consequences for your actions. 
    NimBluef
  • JacenJacen Member Posts: 2,304 @@ - Legendary Achaean
    What? I'm saying that the mechanics of each system would be bypassed. But if it works like Antonius suggested (Kill me once, contract is fulfilled, kill me again, bounty fulfilled, kill me again, writ is fulfilled) then everything works just fine. 
    image
    Bluef
  • SantarSantar Member Posts: 2,382 @@ - Legendary Achaean
    If you look at the PK system as, "I will do X, and then I will die X times for it" you're probably not going to have a good time PKing in general.

    Most people who enjoyably enter into PK situations do so under the mindset that they want to -win- some or most encounters, even if it doesn't pan out that way all the time.

    image

    JovoloSherazad
  • IuneosIuneos Member Posts: 77 ✭✭✭ - Distinguished
    Your complaining about dying three times because you took a shit on sometimes proverbial doorstep.  
    NimJacenBluef
  • JacenJacen Member Posts: 2,304 @@ - Legendary Achaean
    Iuneos said:
    It seems to me that you want to do whatever you feel like without having to deal with consequences for your actions. 
    Then it seems to me like you skimmed this thread, found an opportunity do to some chest-puffing and don't have anything to contribute. 

    I'm perfectly fine with accepting the consequences of my actions, I just want more clarification on what those consequences are and what I should do if things have gone over board.
    image
    Bluef
  • IuneosIuneos Member Posts: 77 ✭✭✭ - Distinguished
    If you defile a zealous city's shrines, you'll die a lot. 
    Bluef
  • JovoloJovolo EnglandMember Posts: 3,162 @@ - Legendary Achaean
    Yeah, Santar articulated my thoughts perfectly. If you go into PK situations with the mechanical mindset of "I've generated 2 cause on myself... or is it 3?" you're going to get pissed off with conflict and very quickly. Just use your common sense - if you've defiled a shrine to x Divine, or raided x City, the people loyal to those organisations aren't going to be happy with you for the forseeable future (I think 6 to 12 months in-game is a fair estimate for minor aggression) and you should be open to being attacked by them. If you aren't, don't participate. It isn't as complicated as people try and make it out to be, (and I'm not targeting you Jacen just fyi), and those people are usually the ones that count cause, and hide behind issues as a means of getting their retribution rather than seeking in-character means or just accepting a defeat. 

    That's not even mechanics of the PK system or integrated rules of it, it's just a part of roleplaying in a living environment.
    SherazadMelodie
  • NimNim Member Posts: 2,015 @@ - Legendary Achaean
    @Iuneos: What society or culture do you come from where putting words in someone's mouth like that isn't being a jerk?
    JulesJacenBluef
  • IuneosIuneos Member Posts: 77 ✭✭✭ - Distinguished
    As for the overboard thing,  when you start quantifying how many times do and so can do something based off an event,  you get more lawyering. No one wants lawyers
  • IuneosIuneos Member Posts: 77 ✭✭✭ - Distinguished
    Lol @nim I'm just expressing my thoughts. Please don't censor me or I will issue you ig and complain to my senator about you. 
    AtalkezSherazadStrataPraxides
  • JulesJules Member Posts: 2,169 @ - Epic Achaean
    Santar said:
    If you look at the PK system as, "I will do X, and then I will die X times for it" you're probably not going to have a good time PKing in general.

    Most people who enjoyably enter into PK situations do so under the mindset that they want to -win- some or most encounters, even if it doesn't pan out that way all the time.

    This is exactly the problem.  Very few people have the wherewithal to do that, or to learn to do that anytime soon.  Even if they did, a few people are always going to be at the top, and people who are slightly less good are going to net increasing losses.  

    Most of the game is fairly alienated by, or at least intimidated/awed by (and either way, pretty much not participating in) PK.  Thinking back on it, I'd wager that this was a big part of Shallam's constant power struggle between people who wanted to be more militant and people who wanted *nothing* to do with PK (to be fair, here in Achaea they can and should probably move to Cyrene, but yeah).  I'm not sure if Targ is having the same problem, but it seems likely.  People know intuitively that they don't have the skills to not consistently lose, and that by "getting involved", unless they are incredibly careful, and place strict limits on themselves (as I do, when I go to Annwyn for pudding, or take part in Icon battles, or the Conclave battle), they could easily find they'd signed up for waaaaaaaay more than they can handle.  The irony of the situation is that I think it tends to make the game *more* anti-PK.  
  • MakoMako Member Posts: 150 ✭✭✭ - Distinguished
    Pros vs Cons
    Pros:Pk gain is more than pk loss if you practice up a bit and are not a jester or a shaman. Its fun. You earn respect. and the RUSH!
    Cons: People invest time in hunting and when they die its upsetting yeah. People just randomly kill you sometimes.

    Ps
    The game is a lot better if you choose a side that has a moral obligation or a fanatical belief of somekind.  Leave Hashan


    AustereStrataAlaskar
  • AustereAustere TennesseeMember Posts: 2,232 @@ - Legendary Achaean
    Mako said:
    Pros vs Cons
    Pros:Pk gain is more than pk loss if you practice up a bit and are not a jester or a shaman. Its fun. You earn respect. and the RUSH!
    Cons: People invest time in hunting and when they die its upsetting yeah. People just randomly kill you sometimes.

    Ps
    The game is a lot better if you choose a side that has a moral obligation or a fanatical belief of somekind.  Leave Hashan


    Moral of the story: everyone should just be trying to gain dragon through pk.
  • SaevaSaeva Member Posts: 1,939 @@ - Legendary Achaean
    Extrum is a great Jester (if I'm recalling the proper character) and Kafziel is a deadly shaman. I'm not sure why they have such a negative reputation. Naah was also starting to get her jester skills whipped into serious shape.


    Alcinae
  • JacenJacen Member Posts: 2,304 @@ - Legendary Achaean
    Jovolo said:
    Yeah, Santar articulated my thoughts perfectly. If you go into PK situations with the mechanical mindset of "I've generated 2 cause on myself... or is it 3?" you're going to get pissed off with conflict and very quickly. Just use your common sense - if you've defiled a shrine to x Divine, or raided x City, the people loyal to those organisations aren't going to be happy with you for the forseeable future (I think 6 to 12 months in-game is a fair estimate for minor aggression) and you should be open to being attacked by them. If you aren't, don't participate. It isn't as complicated as people try and make it out to be, (and I'm not targeting you Jacen just fyi), and those people are usually the ones that count cause, and hide behind issues as a means of getting their retribution rather than seeking in-character means or just accepting a defeat. 

    That's not even mechanics of the PK system or integrated rules of it, it's just a part of roleplaying in a living environment.
    This exemplifies what I'm saying, though. On one hand, a respected PKer is saying that you probably shouldn't die more than once for defiling a shrine (@Antonius) while on the other, you're saying I should expect up to two weeks of retaliation for defiling a shrine. What's acceptable? What's not? Am I not allowed to issue or claim being griefed if I defiled a shrine two weeks ago?

    I don't know if I'm not getting my point across or what, I don't see what's so hard to understand about this. We have people saying "this action is definitely illegal" and the same people saying "Suck it up, you shouldn't do x if you didn't want it to happen"

    I'm not necessarily counting deaths, but I know that I ( and most people that start into PK conflict) am going to go a long ways backwards before I start eeking my way forwards, and fuck, I'd like to protect my hundreds of hours of investment against consequences that some respectable people have said are being levied unfairly.
    image
    Bluef
  • StrataStrata United States of DerpMember Posts: 1,753 @ - Epic Achaean
    They don't necessarily have a bad reputation. It's just difficult for the good side of them to shine due to the way they play their classes.
    image
  • AtalkezAtalkez Member Posts: 4,842 @@ - Legendary Achaean

    I've been super hard PK mode for over a year now, and am barely starting to actually see xp gains through it. If more people would make it a point to speak with the person that they killed/killed them, as to why and what you could have done to not die, I feel like the environment would be a better one.

    Most of the time, people get upset not necessarily about the death, but about how they died, because they don't know what it is or how to defend it or sometimes just get lolganked. Seems like communication is failing on both ends of the spectrum.



    You hug Aurora compassionately.
    PraxidesSaevaChiam
  • XithXith Member Posts: 2,602 @@ - Legendary Achaean
    edited September 2014
    If you're facing:
    - griefy tactics (multi-person ganks)
    - ganks without cause
    then you can hire a mark, or just avenge yourself.

    The above doesn't apply if you are:
    - infamous
    - in open hostilities with the aggressor(s)' org(s)
    - a neo maxi zoom dweebie

    If you are one of those things, or did something to deserve attacks:
    - suck it up

    If you didn't, then "suck it up" definitely doesn't apply because that's terrible RP. Meta-death is an unfortunate side-effect of a well-developed combat game, but since Achaea is also a glorious RP environment, try not to devalue death and make everything about mechanics. That's - I think - the whole point in the switch from PK "cause" to RP common sense.
    I like my steak like I like my Magic cards: mythic rare.
Sign In to Comment.