How fun the Reckoning is as an event

Vinzent

Minifie said:

Achilles said:

And Cyrene above has said we haven't helped him.  It's been super cringe watching them die needlessly at times but we can't share or warn them.  We have a ceasefire with them for obvious reasons, but we have had one hand (maybe both) tied behind our backs since early on in this event.

I can also post logs of Cyrenians from Discord telling me they've been helping/helped with you. You are either arguing from delusion or just ignoring evidence offered. I am unsure which, but at this point you should just clarify YOU personally don't work with Cyrene, but accept that there is this going on. No one really cares if you do, but being dishonest about it on an OOC level while doing nothing about it IC reeks of being deliberately dishonest.

I paid for that, trying to imply I can't use it to stop myself from getting chain backstabbed is stupid.

Minifie

Vinzent said:

Minifie said:

Achilles said:

And Cyrene above has said we haven't helped him.  It's been super cringe watching them die needlessly at times but we can't share or warn them.  We have a ceasefire with them for obvious reasons, but we have had one hand (maybe both) tied behind our backs since early on in this event.

I can also post logs of Cyrenians from Discord telling me they've been helping/helped with you. You are either arguing from delusion or just ignoring evidence offered. I am unsure which, but at this point you should just clarify YOU personally don't work with Cyrene, but accept that there is this going on. No one really cares if you do, but being dishonest about it on an OOC level while doing nothing about it IC reeks of being deliberately dishonest.

I paid for that, trying to imply I can't use it to stop myself from getting chain backstabbed is stupid.

While sitting on Cyrenians. . . Not killing them. . . But rezzing them. Damn, it's like you didn't even read the post. 

Oh wait, nevermind, ha, almost assumed you had a point there.

Sothantos

Why are you guys still arguing with them? They're not going to be happy unless we literally leave the area when Cyrenians enter and opt out of this event entirely.

Minifie

Just be consistent, instead of roleplaying on the forums! Ya'll have done nada IG other than hang on Cyrene's balls.

Iocun

Laedha said:
I would be surprised if the referendum actually decided the top candidates. And anyway, even if it did, admin at least had the choice of how many candidates to include. 5 is literally the worst number they could have possibly chosen. No city has multiple possible candidates, only one candidate has two aligned cities. It was a bad decision, IMO. I know admin works incredibly hard and I think this event is great in a lot of ways, but they didn't -have- to have a referendum for the candidates, and they didn't -have- to pick exactly 5.  

Are you saying it was a fake referendum and the numbers were heavily modified by the admins? I seriously doubt that, as not only would that be easily detectable and cause a huge backlash, but I'm also pretty sure they'd have chosen a different set of candidates if it was up to them. Wavel was the only candidate that wasn't the idea of any player, as far as I know, and he didn't make it in. Again, the only way there would have been no teams would be 6 candidates, each tied closely to one of the cities and personally, I think that would have been the most boring option, politically.

Personally, I had actually expected much more strategizing, diplomacy and splits within factions than the clear-cut "we nominate one of us and support him until the end" we saw from four of the cities and the admins might have as well. It's not as if having 5 candidates necessarily meant having 4 faction candidates and one split one. It might just as well have been 3 neutral candidates and two factional ones, or one faction getting two candidates in, or many more possibilities.

Milabar

Well sure glad we've eliminated talk about Eleusis in this little alliance, and also that we've basically eliminated any stress from us to do shit in this event.

We are watching with our bags of popcorn though.

Carry on

Ismay

I'm having fun just watching the show, with no desire whatsoever to participate. I'm not masochistic enough for that.

Archaeon

I like the pk and I think more events should be two weeks straight of murder

Laedha

Personally, I had actually expected much more strategizing, diplomacy and splits within factions than the clear-cut "we nominate one of us and support him until the end" we saw from four of the cities and the admins might have as well. It's not as if having 5 candidates necessarily meant having 4 faction candidates and one split one. It might just as well have been 3 neutral candidates and two factional ones, or one faction getting two candidates in, or many more possibilities.

Maybe, maybe not. Even so, picking exactly 5 candidates once they saw the referendum results was just a bad idea given that there are 6 cities and cities have to pick a single candidate.   

They also had the choice of which denizens would respond when people started talking to them. This would have been a lot more interesting if the choices were like..... Wavel, Vewig, Gothmog, and Apollonia. Denizens with much less clear associations with specific cities. They could have had the city-aligned denizens just not respond or tell them to sod off. 

Iocun

Well, they had announced it was going to be 5 before the referendum started, so they couldn't change it afterwards. And not having certain denizens respond would have been a pretty poor way to go about it, in my opinion. You can't feign to have a player-driven event and then simply not allow players to actually make choices. I think the admins were trying to steer us a bit away from just direct city candidates (e.g. Hycanthus did tell Cyrene to look outside and the admins did bring Wavel into play), but eventually it was up to the players.

I wouldn't have minded if they simply had excluded players from it completely at the start and simply came up with 5 denizen candidates on their own, but for the sake of player engagement, it also makes sense to give players a great amount of freedom of choice, even if they occasionally make a "poor" use of it.

Minifie

We should have all just voted for Titania and then handed in 0 facets so Eleusis would perpetually be in a state of having both won and not won. 

Silas

@Minifie still needs to post 95% less. Totally contentless, stupid posts.

That aside, while this event isn't for me, given that I have no desire at this point to no-life Achaea to give some denizen I'd barely even heard of previously a seat on the Conclave, the thing that's been most disappointing about this event has been the admin's OOC stance bleeding IC.

I get that people don't want Cyrene and Targossas to work together, but the way Aurora has gone about it has been incredibly stupid and annoying. Like it or not, the two cities are backing the same candidate. Telling Targossas not to assist Cyrene when the two cities are working towards the same goal is asinine at best. Killing your own citizens for being near Cyrenians in a world event is dumb as fuck.

If the administration didn't want two cities working together, they should have put up six candidates. Having one volunteer god work directly against the city they patron does nothing but foster ill-feeling amongst the text-citizenry. It happened in Shallam when the Te'serra were raging bitches and it's happening now in Targossas when Aurora is being perceived the same.

Looks like the previous Reckoning isn't the only thing the admins haven't learned anything from. C'est la vie.

Sothantos

We also went into this nominating Pryla'ari with the intention of forming alliances, because we thought that is what everyone else was going to do. There was no objection until after everyone started complaining on forums.

This stance that 'obviously this event is meant to be an FFA' is silly, especially since our own city denizens suggested that we approach candidates outside of Targossas.

Silas

Kind of a shame too, since it definitely doesn't feel like this directive is coming from Aurora - definitely feels like an admin response to forum crying. Rory's the one ending up looking silly tho.

Keorin

It's just come off as incredibly petty and inconsistent on the part of the admin, both IC and OOC, to those of us in Cyrene. Like, I don't see a defense for how working with and negotiating with the Tsol'teth or Zsarachnor is acceptable for Targossas, but cooperating with -Cyrene- is apparently where the line is drawn.

But yeah, the admin encouraged Cyrene to look outside the city, they -knew- that both cities had interest in supporting Pryla'ari for the voting, and -then- they set the vote up to guarantee that one city wouldn't get a candidate through (and it was pretty predictable that it'd be Cyrene). This may as well have been -designed- to get Cyrene and Targossas to work together, a lot of us assumed it was a likely outcome the moment the voting was announced. And they seemed more than happy with the situation for the first several days that it was going on.

In total, it makes it very, very hard not to read this situation as a direct response to people's complaints on forums, and it's coloured this whole event very badly for a lot of us.

Lenn

I'm personally fine with the alliance because there's an element of risk/reward. If you support a denizen who's already aligned with your city, presumably whatever benefit there is for them winning will be that much more personal, whereas Cyrene and Targossas are mainly just ensuring a bad candidate doesn't win and might receive a boon or two in thanks.

A wizard conclave relying on 1) democratic vote and 2) the perceived intelligence of the candidate's supporters seems dumb to me though. "Ugh, I hate how foolish adventurers are, they can barely understand simple instructions, time to let them decide our new member."

Keorin

I will say, speaking entirely OOCly Sevet might actually be my favorite candidate (I'm pretty biased here, though. Ages ago I played a Mhaldorian forestal, so I love the aesthetic). Generally speaking I wouldn't be unhappy with him winning, since I think it'd be neat to see him more in events.

But if this whole event is decided by admin intervening, and especially if it all comes down to shitty veildeliver mechanics (as is looking increasingly likely), I'm going to be unbelievably pissed.

Archaeon

"Wah wah admin put on a fun as fuck event that's able to use skill sets from almost every player in the game in the middle of a pandemic and I'm going to complain about how I don't think it's fair that someone rp'd in a way I don't like"
t. everyone

Iocun

Lenn said:

A wizard conclave relying on 1) democratic vote and 2) the perceived intelligence of the candidate's supporters seems dumb to me though. "Ugh, I hate how foolish adventurers are, they can barely understand simple instructions, time to let them decide our new member."

Yeah, that's really my main gripe with the event. I don't really mind how the event works mechanically, but RP-wise much of it doesn't seem very credible to me. You'd think the candidates themselves would be tested quite a bit more, rather than just their supporters.

Kog

Iocun said:

Lenn said:

A wizard conclave relying on 1) democratic vote and 2) the perceived intelligence of the candidate's supporters seems dumb to me though. "Ugh, I hate how foolish adventurers are, they can barely understand simple instructions, time to let them decide our new member."

Yeah, that's really my main gripe with the event. I don't really mind how the event works mechanically, but RP-wise much of it doesn't seem very credible to me. You'd think the candidates themselves would be tested quite a bit more, rather than just their supporters.

This is just reality TV for the Conclave. In the end they're going to appoint Wavel.

Sobriquet

Keorin said:

I will say, speaking entirely OOCly Sevet might actually be my favorite candidate (I'm pretty biased here, though. Ages ago I played a Mhaldorian forestal, so I love the aesthetic). Generally speaking I wouldn't be unhappy with him winning, since I think it'd be neat to see him more in events.

But if this whole event is decided by admin intervening, and especially if it all comes down to shitty veildeliver mechanics (as is looking increasingly likely), I'm going to be unbelievably pissed.

I've played this game for 16yrs and would frankly be dumbfounded if the Admin decided this themselves, that's never been their style. Also, if you think a single instance of getting Velideliver wrong for a single facet is going to be the difference then you need to take a step back.

I've been in two boss fights, didn't like either so have stayed away and have very little interest in the event or its outcome, but watching from the outside has been intriguing

Keorin

The admin stepped in to force Cyrene and Targossas to be less effective after all the forum whining, which has already made a huge difference. And we'll how close things are after the quiz/finale, I suppose.

Big Papa Jomi

Sothantos said:

We also went into this nominating Pryla'ari with the intention of forming alliances, because we thought that is what everyone else was going to do. There was no objection until after everyone started complaining on forums.

This stance that 'obviously this event is meant to be an FFA' is silly, especially since our own city denizens suggested that we approach candidates outside of Targossas.

Who else was going to back Sevet besides Mhaldor? Maim by Ashtan? Titania by Eleusis? All the opposite could have been suggested by city denizens, but cmon..... Would be going against RP. 


At this point, I care less about the alliance and more about the RP, which appears to be heavily lacking. All Cyrene vs. Targossas hostility has apparently disappeared. Literally helped the Tsol'teth vs a city that was destroyed by them, and now y'all rezzing each other. Could just as easily gone "fuck you, we're going to show we're better by getting more facets", but now I get to have a field week after this about "blah blah Targrene weak for relying on each other" once this is all over yet all I'm going to get from Cyrene and Targossas is "hurdur we had to, would've been stupid not to", which is exactly what I got the first time I participated in the Reckoning vs Targrene. 

Like okay, OOC, yea, it would've been stupid. But IC it would make sense for them to still be hostile - set up in different rooms, don't rezz each other/protect each other in grandfathered forestal groves, attack different cities, hell, get a lil nasty and breathrain everyone when you see each other engaging other cities because fuck you, we'll kill the opposition and you for thinking you're a better force. Tell Achilles to stun bomb them on boss denizen so you can swoop in and steal the kill. Literally keeping each safe was not your only option.

I don't care that you're working together. It's obviously not going to stop. It's just stupid that you let OOC bleed into what was supposed to be an RP event, and now it's just going to be some patchy shitty excuses IC. What can I say ICly against "it'd be stupid not to work together" when I know that is an OOC stance without any realistic IC spin on it?

Like I said, I don't care about the alliance anymore. I just care that I can't get any meaningful IC interaction from Cyrene or Targossas after this because I've already been told an OOC excuse IC during it. Unless you're going to retcon, of course, and at that point, I don't even want to try to RP with any of you about this.

Sothantos

Why is 'it's stupid not to work together' considered an OOC stance? Is being practical somehow a nonexistent school of thought in-game?

Keorin

If you think that the decision for Cyrene and Targossas to work together, or even work together more closely in the beginning of the event, was somehow an OOC decision, then you have a very limited understanding of both Cyrene and Targossas' roleplay.

People have been both dramatically been overestimating the level of hostilities that existed before this event and dramatically underestimating the level of hostilities that exist now ever since this event started. I would suggest learning more ICly before you complain, if you genuinely think that this was somehow unreasonable, or outside of the cities and their leaders' roleplay.

Fundamentally this is just an unproductive discussion and has been since the start of this. When people say "This goes against your roleplay" then 99% of the time what they actually seem to mean is "This goes against how I personally wanted to see your cities act". If you genuinely want to understand, I'm sure any of our leadership would be more than happy to fill you in. But if you've already decided that you, of all people, have the most authoritative understanding of our roleplay, and so you don't even want to interact with us anymore because we're so out of line with it and therefore OOC, then I don't think we're the ones letting OOC judgments colour our IC stance.

Big Papa Jomi

Sothantos said:

Why is 'it's stupid not to work together' considered an OOC stance? Is being practical somehow a nonexistent school of thought in-game?

Because it doesn't make sense when two cities have been hostile and fairly at odds since the Tsol'teth and now you're all buddy-buddy without any sort of other justification or attempts to keep that hostility up. All previous feelings apparently went out the door once this started. It's practical but you're essentially ignoring what happened in the past.

Especially for Cyrene who got hit so hard.

Shirszae

Big Papa Jomi said:

Sothantos said:

Why is 'it's stupid not to work together' considered an OOC stance? Is being practical somehow a nonexistent school of thought in-game?

Because it doesn't make sense when two cities have been hostile and fairly at odds since the Tsol'teth and now you're all buddy-buddy without any sort of other justification or attempts to keep that hostility up. All previous feelings apparently went out the door once this started. It's practical but you're essentially ignoring what happened in the past.

Especially for Cyrene who got hit so hard.

If you actually were privy to Cyrene or Targ interactions you'd know this is not true. There's plenty of tension and no one's buddy buddy. Practicality of having the same goal is all that keeps things teniously going.

Attacking targ at the very opportunity when both Cyrene and Targ are working for the same thing would be a case of having the Idiot Ball, not great rp

Big Papa Jomi

Shirszae said:

Big Papa Jomi said:

Sothantos said:

Why is 'it's stupid not to work together' considered an OOC stance? Is being practical somehow a nonexistent school of thought in-game?

Because it doesn't make sense when two cities have been hostile and fairly at odds since the Tsol'teth and now you're all buddy-buddy without any sort of other justification or attempts to keep that hostility up. All previous feelings apparently went out the door once this started. It's practical but you're essentially ignoring what happened in the past.

Especially for Cyrene who got hit so hard.

If you actually were privy to Cyrene or Targ interactions you'd know this is not true. There's plenty of tension and no one's buddy buddy. Practicality of having the same goal is all that keeps things teniously going.

Attacking targ at the very opportunity when both Cyrene and Targ are working for the same thing would be a case of having the Idiot Ball, not great rp

Then I look forward to all evidence to the contrary when this is all over because I'm definitely not seeing anything to suggest that anywhere or by anyone at all whatsoever.

And how is it not great rp? Sure maybe not GREAT, nothing about this event is great, but at least consistent? But like you said, apparently it's still there, so obviously we're going to see how this all comes together instead of cherry picking, and I'll be able to start interacting with both cities with the Reckoning and the Conclave as a reason to do so.

Syrennia

There's three big takeaways I've gotten from this thread.

1) If someone disagrees with you, they're a troll.

--edit for comment: They might very well be. Doesn't mean their disagreement is invalid, nor is it actually a counter to what they're saying.

2) People really love the "no u" argument, when they can't actually back anything up.

3) It's a good thing almost none of you practice law, given you seem to think word of mouth trumps evidence.

Archaeon

no u