City Guards

Austere

So the recent conversation in rants thread, and a lot of attempts by a few have led me to believe that it is time we take a second look at the current situation enabling individuals to, in effect, move non-stationary guards to within call range of any room in the city, at anytime, and utilize them in defense. 

I believe the current playerbase has shown that we are able to show restraint when it comes to attacking other cities.  Yes, sometimes we do get a bit carried away with our zealotry and attack people when we probably should not.  I know I am guilty of this and I doubt many are not.  However, I also believe that we are all capable of stopping for a minute and truly assessing a situation.  I have been asked to stop raiding before.  I have been shown the numbers in an OOC manner and been able to translate that into an IC win for myself and my team.  I have also been able to assess a situation from a defensive standpoint.  Ic, my character has never wavered in his response to encroaching enemies.  OOC, however, I have asked @Jhui to stop messing with shrines bordering Targossas.  I have told him who we have around, and he has stepped off, encouraging us to respond when we do have the numbers.  We are all(mostly) adults, here to have fun.  No one wants to play on a team that consistently loses and we as a player base need to take a step back and remember that at all times. 

With this in mind, because certain members of the playerbase are attempting to effectively nerf guards, its time for the administration to step in.  As a community, making alliances and agreements to not utilize guards really does not make any sense.  Why should we not?  I recently sat down and attempted to compose an ic letter asking Targossas not to utilize guard movement, beyond standard call for help, in any raid.  I was unable to make a plausible enough reason to feel comfortable posting it to the city.  Anything I wrote can be argued with a simple flick of the Axioms.  There is literally no reason for Targossas to go along with this idea.  I have poured my heart and soul into a letter I sent asking for some compliance in the initiative and I fully expect to see it torn to shreads.  Why should it not?  Why would a city not use every item at their disposal to remove enemies?  Even if by some chance we DO succeed in some ingame initiative, what are the chances it can be maintained?  Who is going to be the first one to break the OOC truce that we bandaid fixed IG?  Someone should start a book on it.  I guarantee it doesn't last long.

City guards, in their current state, make a halfway organized defense unstoppable.  Silence does nothing when you have occultist that can timewarp, other magi that can dampen, and monks to enfeeble choke the magi holding the vibes.  Pulling guards that are being summoned is impossible if proper precautions are taken.  Rushing a summoner works, yet if the summoner is a class with any type of area attack, they can more than likely clear your group once you factor in the guards on top of arc, retardation, chaosrays, holocaust, breathrain, and whatever else you can conjure up.  

I am definitely not the expert on guards, so if I am missing something here, feel free to point it out. 

@Tecton, @Makarios, @Sarapis.  Take another look at this.  

(Obligatory, please release multiclass) Fix guards, please?

Tharvis

while I do agree that guards need looked at, this topic is a double-edged blade.

On one hand, you have the concept of defenders effectively having the high ground on their home turf - which is logical, but can be abused if the caller has a lyre and can stand out of line of sight (I tested it earlier, if I CITY GUARD STATION, I can strum lyre directly afterwards without interrupting the station - does not apply to CITY GUARD HIRE - this probably needs looked at)

Now, on the other hand, if we hypothetically assume guards would be harder to move/place, what exactly is stopping a raiding team from bringing in more people regardless? What will stop a raiding team (if the ones with the mindset of fun for both sides aren't around) from just going "Hey, let's kill the guards now they're nerfed!" if their damage/health hypothetically gets reduced?
And don't start about common sense or a sense of bringing fun to both sides, you can always argue that avenue, but I do believe we've all seen proof of the opposite - from all camps

Hasar

Could speed up tank time to level 1 for every guard that is re-stationed during a sanction. Could also make it take even longer for guards to move with station.

Austere

Your city has a font for the high-ground.  You have hundreds of rooms with totems, easier access to the entrance and exit of a city(assumption being they are inside) as well as city improvements like orb.  What more advantage do you need?  Not every fight needs to be a victory, I am just asking that not every fight against one competent individual that can whore guards end in defeat.

As it stands, I am already perfectly capable of dumping on any city I choose during my timezone.  When I first login, there is a little resistance in just about every city, but by the time my night is halfway over, I can pretty much go and raid anyone I like.  The fact that you do not see the entire city of Targossas entering your city late at night and destroying everything in sight on a frequent basis is an example of player restraint.  Player restraint is NOT something I have that is unique in the slightest.  Everyday that Jhui chooses not to bring the entire city of Ashtan to Targossas while I am at work and there are 6 of us around is player restraint.  Every night that Xinna chooses not to bring the 13 or 14 fighting Mhaldorians that are around to uproot all of our totems, kill our guards, and buy out our shops IS an example of this. 

No where in my request did I ask for guards to have less health or damage.  I am requesting that the ability to move them, without a care in the world, be extremely limited or removed entirely. 

Tharvis

@Hasar's suggestion is the more reasonable when compared to extremely limiting or removing the ability to move guards during a sanction - there have been fights where a fairly numbered team came in, got the kills for a sanction due to a small miscalculation on the defender's part, and suddenly a tank is placed and the numbers on the offenders side nearly doubled, completely outgunning the defenders. This specific case has happened at least four times in a defense against Eleusis.
Without the ability to move guards, that's basically game over directly. And with an extremely limited (I assume this means drastically slower) chances are you won't even get the chance to attempt to level the playing field.

Sure, you can argue font helps here, but if you're outnumbered and outartefacted, the font quickly loses its usefulness, except on the Quake front.

Jhui

Hasar's suggestion doesn't change much.  If someone wants to move guards they will still move them.  Maybe 2-3 people will learn how and be more efficient with it.

Pretty clear that the new norm will become teaching as many people to move guards as you can and do it.  Not to mention, the defenders could just station them near the tank and not use them until it feels like they're going to lose, then call them.

What we're seeking here is for a way to keep city defenses at a state where they don't become an 'eject' button.

This will only result in griefy attitudes by both sides bringing curbstompy numbers and just guard killing all the time.


@Tharvis let the room go bro, if it's outside of guard range, it's probably not a big deal if it goes down.  No reason to make tanks impossible just because you got sanctioned by a superior force and still wanted a button to stop it.  Enough things are in place to help against this. 

Rip

Just get rid of Guards all together...thanks in advance.

Ethoas

It seems to me that guards have perpetuated a 'we should always win when we dont want to fight (and in some cases, lose)' mentality.

I for one would be in favor of removing guards in total, since it is the PVP climate I am used to (RIP Darkness Falls), but alas this is not plausible because too many would find hard-mode, well, hard.

What if you put cooldowns on stationing? Durations for immediate positioning in the moment, and durations for strategic positioning long-term?

Would have to look at CFH, and give it its own cooldown too, or you could perhaps rip this out as a mechanic entirely.

 But a concept similar to this might allow for an emphasis on strategy, with room for mistakes, and add even a small element of 'war' by being able to engage in managing units to slow or stop an opponent.

Tharvis

call for help already has a cooldown where they ignore further calls for a set period after being called. Not sure on the exact timeframe.

Ethoas

That i did not know, i have never used it let alone tested it. Perhaps it would be best to rip it out entirely or only give CFH perms to newbies who totally need it, like their protection from theft etc..

Morthif

Is it out of the range of programming to make guards that are CFH'd do less damage then guards do in their assigned rooms? If guards came in and all targeted different people and were more of a defending group helper then an eject button it would be more fun to deal with.

Make guard types do medium speed affs or moderate damage to compliment the group, give ability to shatter lyre's or even becalm so long as on their own they will die easily to raiders.

Kakotas

Tharvis said:

while I do agree that guards need looked at, this topic is a double-edged blade.

On one hand, you have the concept of defenders effectively having the high ground on their home turf - which is logical, but can be abused if the caller has a lyre and can stand out of line of sight (I tested it earlier, if I CITY GUARD STATION, I can strum lyre directly afterwards without interrupting the station - does not apply to CITY GUARD HIRE - this probably needs looked at)

Now, on the other hand, if we hypothetically assume guards would be harder to move/place, what exactly is stopping a raiding team from bringing in more people regardless? What will stop a raiding team (if the ones with the mindset of fun for both sides aren't around) from just going "Hey, let's kill the guards now they're nerfed!" if their damage/health hypothetically gets reduced?
And don't start about common sense or a sense of bringing fun to both sides, you can always argue that avenue, but I do believe we've all seen proof of the opposite - from all camps

As someone who was in one of the places that got camped with some regularity (including one christmas break I think I only logged in once where I wasn't insta ganked within 5 seconds in a period of several RL days). I don't think this is a great idea.

Guards serve 3 purposes. 1-You will not be able to camp an enemy city permanently or if so that it can be broken eventually, 2-to provide some modicum of protection especially for newbies who are in cities trying to learn the game or learning from adventurers (so barring having safe rooms they are the next best thing), 3-Making it so that you actually have to earn a raid and that even cities that aren't PVP based have a chance.

-Any solution would have to address all three of those issues.

Jarrod

Ethoas said:

It seems to me that guards have perpetuated a 'we should always win when we dont want to fight (and in some cases, lose)' mentality.

This sentiment to me is more on the attackers side. The mentality that 'we should always win when we want to fight'. There are many, many, many counters and ways you can plan a raid to prepare for and effectively negate guard usage. If you're worried about guards, use those strategies. If you refuse to utilize strategies that work to counter guard calling, then that is your fault, not the fault of the mechanics in place.

The most I think that should  be changed with guards is to make it so only 1 guard can be re-stationed at a time, in the city. No other guards can be attempted to be moved until the first either succeeds or fails.

Most of the sentiment that I see from those that dislike the mechanics of guards is that because we wanted a fight that we thought would be fun, the mechanic that prevents us from having fun is a bad mechanic. Guards work exactly as intended, a way to force out raiders who inadequately prepared for guards, and to prevent raids from going on for an excessive amount of time.

Rip

I don't know...I walk around the cities and 90% of the people are AFKing on guards.  Now I don't "raid" but they (guards) seem highly overpowered.  I say ditch the whole concept and let the players defend.

Ethoas

Track records of those that call guards show us we do not utilize them in the way you think we do, or for the intended purpose. 

They are almost always used as an ez eject/fuck you button. And just like there are counters to raiding vs. Guards, there are counters to defending against a group half your size, without needing an eject button (which also happens frequently).

The way guards have been used since i became a player have more or less made raiding and defending pretty dumb in general, and the need for it to be addressed and resolved on an OOC level is quite telling of the fact that it is being abused as a mechanic and not used in the way it was meant to be. And if not this, then it is indeed a bad mechanic that needs reevaluated.

The only conflict ive ever enjoyed in this game has been out of city skirms, or lawless plane fights.

Other than that the group pvp climate to me is pretty fuckin stagnant and limited and boring. Of course there are exceptions to everything im spewing, but thats just my experience.

Jarrod

Ethoas said:

They are almost always used as an ez eject/fuck you button.

This, to me, falls under "a way to force out raiders who inadequately prepare for guards".

Ethoas

Not really, it is just the inadequate logic you are clinging to in order to justify petty and needless use of fuck you buttons, and those petty and needless uses of fuck you buttons have proven to be a problem both mechanically and on a player level, such that it is unhealthy for interesting group pvp.

I have seen you rage about guards in instances nearly identical to the ones in which you have called or restationed guards yourself. But selective reasoning is selective reasoning, especially when it comes to being honest about reality and identifying a real problem. And since you like using fuck you buttons but dislike dealing with them yourself tells me that it is more than just being adequately prepared. With your intimate knowledge of guards, youd think Mhaldor would never get guarded, and that youd never have a need to rage about guards. But Mhaldor gets guarded and youve bitched about guards (petty and needless use of them, bc when else does anyone ever bitch about guards. When its unwarranted!).

Something is off here.

To say otherwise means youd have to stop deflecting and admit you abuse guards as much as the regular offenders, and that requires humility, or for you to enter the dialogue with a new, fresh argument that would still allow you to save face.

If there is not a problem with them, and they are so counterable or manageable with adequate preparation, i expect from here on out, Mhaldor to never get rekt by guards, and you to never rage about them, again.

If that happens, there is indeed no problem and we can all move on.

Rip

Just get rid of guards, they are AFK rooms for citizens.  Calling Mobs to help your defense of a city is just...eww.

Ethoas

I mean we need a better reason than dislike to justify removing them, @Rip

Halos

Just to refocus and clarify, @Rip, the conversation in the rants thread (and this conversation) is about constables and CALL FOR HELP as a kneejerk response to (presumably equal numbers) raids. Not other types of (stationary) guards, which are rarely moved and can be easily avoided.

Jarrod

The last time I was annoyed by guards was when Ashtan asked us to raided then immediately guarded us, because we raided purely by request without planning to deal with them.

The last time I had a setup I planned in-city Targ tried to prep guards and it just let us tank faster.

Jhui

Rather than refuting anything you say, let's just see the future here.

This talk is clearly showing that moving/calling guards is the norm and will become the primary way people are taught to not lose in city defense.

Is this something we want?  Do we want to have to go into a raid with enough numbers to combat guard usage?  Does every raid need a serpent to step in the path of the guards as they are being called and lyre them or evade them away so they don't make it to the raid group?

If it's something T thinks the cities need, then that is fine by me.  Guards are an in-game response to win.  Luckily, we are tooled with other in-game responses such as guard killing or even offensive worldburning.  It's a fair playing field, certainly, but is it fun?

Atalkez

Just make it so that if the sanction is up, you can't station guards anymore.

Not sure why this is even a thing.

Jarrod

Last time I talked to T about it he said it was an intended mechanic to be able to re-station while sanction was up, but I did get him to agree to the city-wide alert of re-station if sanction is active.

I don't see a problem with guard strategy being the norm. Maybe it's because I see more ways around it (more and better than the ones raised here) that have worked for me in the past and have yet to be tried vs me. Maybe I just don't mind that you're forced to make efforts to encourage the enemy to have a fun fight and not use guards instead of just trying to ensure you have fun yourself in offensive action.

I think guards are a pretty objective way for a defending city to say "we're not interested in fighting this, so we're going to use guards to try and end it sooner".

Atalkez

Jarrod said:

Last time I talked to T about it he said it was an intended mechanic to be able to re-station while sanction was up, but I did get him to agree to the city-wide alert of re-station if sanction is active.

I don't see a problem with guard strategy being the norm. Maybe it's because I see more ways around it (more and better than the ones raised here) that have worked for me in the past and have yet to be tried vs me. Maybe I just don't mind that you're forced to make efforts to encourage the enemy to have a fun fight and not use guards instead of just trying to ensure you have fun yourself in offensive action.

I think guards are a pretty objective way for a defending city to say "we're not interested in fighting this, so we're going to use guards to try and end it sooner".

I find you confusing, considering for the past several years you certainly didn't mind raiding with the people you're suddenly calling shitty for doing things that you were very much a part of doing. 

You talk as if you're the only one that knows guard mechanics, and how they work. Sure, it's not common knowledge, but you're also not the only one in the game that understands them.

We all know about lyre, flying, evading and how to adjust the guards to be better situation for our group. That doesn't make dealing with guards fun, just because you know how to counter them. I prefer countering skills, not a mechanic that anyone can mash an alias if they don't have Silence in the room. 

I personally don't see an issue with guards in the slightest, except for them being able to be moved during sanction. If you don't want to fight the force, you can move guards before rushing. You can move guards if they come back after the first rush, or the second, third, fourth, and so on.

Once the offensive force has earned a sanction though, why should you be able to continue moving guards to root them out? @Jhui might be stubborn, but he'll get tired of getting pwnt by guards too after the fourth time. 

tl;dr guard strategy is fine prior to sanction. Plenty of options left to the defensive force that allows them to not even give a sanction if they play smart. If you give up a sanction, you should have to then fight on your own skills, not the skills of your city-based uber DKS.

Tesha

It would be interesting to rework guards. I think constables should just be deleted. They're an autowin if things work out, and are easily manipulated otherwise.

To replace constables, I think there should be lesser guards that you could temporarily hire to follow you in the city, with a maximum of five per room. They would be weaker and cheaper. Lesser soldiers could do health damage, lesser warriors could afflict (like.. paralysis/stupidity, if target has paralysis/stupidity, hit someone else or stun), lesser captains could blackout all enemies, lesser istani could hangedman/hinder, and lesser archers could stun/tentacle. Every type should do some decent damage; but I'm thinking 5-8% for non-soldiers, and 15% for soldiers. These ideas for what they could do are just off the top of my head, there are tons of ways to make them more interesting without guaranteeing victory against all but a big group of dragons, or people who abuse lyre bug.

Hopefully this would make guards more enjoyable to use and less frustrating to fight against. More on the level of a strong, expensive font, and less on the level of autowin.

Jhui

Jarrod said:

Last time I talked to T about it he said it was an intended mechanic to be able to re-station while sanction was up, but I did get him to agree to the city-wide alert of re-station if sanction is active.

I don't see a problem with guard strategy being the norm. Maybe it's because I see more ways around it (more and better than the ones raised here) that have worked for me in the past and have yet to be tried vs me. Maybe I just don't mind that you're forced to make efforts to encourage the enemy to have a fun fight and not use guards instead of just trying to ensure you have fun yourself in offensive action.

I think guards are a pretty objective way for a defending city to say "we're not interested in fighting this, so we're going to use guards to try and end it sooner".

definitely a fair stance to take, but likewise killing guards is just as fair of a stance to take against this.


Again, neither seem very fun.

Jarrod

Atalkez said:

I find you confusing, considering for the past several years you certainly didn't mind raiding with the people you're suddenly calling shitty for doing things that you were very much a part of doing. 

This seems to be based on the assumption I can't say I did shitty things with them in the past. I did. It made people not want to fight us then. It makes people not want to fight you now.Atalkez said:

You talk as if you're the only one that knows guard mechanics, and how they work. Sure, it's not common knowledge, but you're also not the only one in the game that understands them.

We all know about lyre, flying, evading and how to adjust the guards to be better situation for our group. That doesn't make dealing with guards fun, just because you know how to counter them. I prefer countering skills, not a mechanic that anyone can mash an alias if they don't have Silence in the room. 

Based on responses in this thread, I might be the only one. Maybe if people started listing the ways I've countered guards most effectively I'll start thinking otherwise, but until then it's kind of funny seeing you reiterate the same things others have said like it's they're only things possible.

Atalkez said:

Once the offensive force has earned a sanction though, why should you be able to continue moving guards to root them out? Jhui might be stubborn, but he'll get tired of getting pwnt by guards too after the fourth time. 

tl;dr guard strategy is fine prior to sanction. Plenty of options left to the defensive force that allows them to not even give a sanction if they play smart. If you give up a sanction, you should have to then fight on your own skills, not the skills of your city-based uber DKS.

Except experience shows that's not the case. He keeps coming back over and over, usually bringing more people, until he's satisfied, without regard to the defenders. If he wants to play that way, fine, but he can't play that way and simultaneously complain about tendencies that develop when people get tired of dealing with it.

The raid scenarios you guys deal with is a direct product of continued, extended raids. I did it with the group before, you're doing it now. It encourages defenders to find the best ways to quickly discourage raiders, because they know that winning is not enough to end the raid. It will continue and continue until finally enough of you log off that your group gets zero kills.

If you encounter the same scenario wherever you raid, maybe consider that the way you raid is the problem, not the way people defend.

Ethoas said:

To say otherwise means youd have to stop deflecting and admit you abuse guards as much as the regular offenders, and that requires humility, or for you to enter the dialogue with a new, fresh argument that would still allow you to save face.

I'm not sure I understand this. I'd say I use (abuse? lol) guards better than most, because I understand them better than most. You'll not find me stating in this discussion that I don't use guards, I do. I know how to use them and I know when people in my city either have no chance because of the group raiding (15+ raiders, 7-8 defenders), have other things they're currently doing, or are just not interested in dealing with the raid for the 2nd hour or longer. I'm going to use them to win fights like this because I know how to and people haven't figured out the strategies to counter me.

Kakotas

Jhui said:

Jarrod said:

Last time I talked to T about it he said it was an intended mechanic to be able to re-station while sanction was up, but I did get him to agree to the city-wide alert of re-station if sanction is active.

I don't see a problem with guard strategy being the norm. Maybe it's because I see more ways around it (more and better than the ones raised here) that have worked for me in the past and have yet to be tried vs me. Maybe I just don't mind that you're forced to make efforts to encourage the enemy to have a fun fight and not use guards instead of just trying to ensure you have fun yourself in offensive action.

I think guards are a pretty objective way for a defending city to say "we're not interested in fighting this, so we're going to use guards to try and end it sooner".

definitely a fair stance to take, but likewise killing guards is just as fair of a stance to take against this.


Again, neither seem very fun.

And when I think of the reasons that most cities are "we're not interested" I can say it makes sense. The number of rituals/all city activities/fill in the blank with hard to orchestrate things that get interrupted just because one side says "oh they are all there lets go raid" it just makes sense that at some point you have a way to say "were busy go away" in something more forceful for those who tend to not like that policy. I can understand if it gets used everytime it is annoying but most times I've seen it used it's been a legit reason. But then again I've been sleeping a lot lately.

Atalkez

Jarrod said:

You talk as if you're the only one that knows guard mechanics, and how they work. Sure, it's not common knowledge, but you're also not the only one in the game that understands them.

We all know about lyre, flying, evading and how to adjust the guards to be better situation for our group. That doesn't make dealing with guards fun, just because you know how to counter them. I prefer countering skills, not a mechanic that anyone can mash an alias if they don't have Silence in the room. 

Based on responses in this thread, I might be the only one. Maybe if people started listing the ways I've countered guards most effectively I'll start thinking otherwise, but until then it's kind of funny seeing you reiterate the same things others have said like it's they're only things possible.

You're not the only one wanting to keep a few tricks to yourself bud!

Rip

City guards, make them "roam about", at the very least...I am not sure about this raiding/guard stuff...seems bleak.

All I know is 90% of you SIT on guards and sit there FOREVER...Which to me is just not what they were meant for.

"Guard Hugging" ...GO!