Mhaldor vs Targossas

Archaeon

I have enough cause on you to fill a cargo hold, which you can then take with you for your next voyage.  The amount of times I've been ganked by Mhaldor (you included in that mixup) is unreal.

Entaro

Archaeon said:

I have enough cause on you to fill a cargo hold, which you can then take with you for your next voyage.  The amount of times I've been ganked by Mhaldor (you included in that mixup) is unreal.

I've only ever attacked you when you've been infamous.

Sothantos

Doesn't that still give him reason to retaliate?

Minifie

Pretty sure people were chastising proficy for cause counting, or being a jerk/"not very reasonable". Just the usual, "rules for thee, not for me" making the game kinda (very) shit.

Archaeon

that doesn't excuse you from me getting payback lol

Entaro

Well, @Astarod apologised so I'm done being annoyed.   It's whatever...

Edit: In answer to your question, I thought infamous v infamous was fair game.  I don't really count cause, but I really try not to break the rules. 

Sothantos

Just give us war infamy so we can happily kill each other without worrying about this.

Minifie

join dauntless/mark

Archaeon

Minifie said:

Pretty sure people were chastising proficy for cause counting, or being a jerk/"not very reasonable". Just the usual, "rules for thee, not for me" making the game kinda (very) shit.

ok lol, there's a huge difference between 'your ground runes hit me, so i'm going to pk you once for each tic' and 'you've been ganking the fuck outta me so now i'm gonna get you once'

same old mhaldor as the old days.  willing to grief, crying when you get the same back.

Stheno

Here's a thought. Rather than waging war like it's one long game of keep-away, where the objective is to starve the fight of as much oxygen as possible until one or both teams can stomp, maybe you could just... wage war? The points are insane enough without everyone and their mother issuing, breaking character to honk about it, and magically appearing once the tank is down after we have to legally scrape together a sanction.

No one likes chasing your no-fun-havers around the map and ganking them, but when you remove avenues of retribution in infamy and retaliation tanks, what is the expected recourse? Just wait for Targossas to rewrite the rules of engagement? Do the same thing, sit on ships and the Inferno to avoid "high-value bounties"?

You can actually change the culture in your city with a little pressure. It's why Mhaldor always defends, well or not, against overwhelming odds, and will refuse to quit the city if we're occupied, which you've clearly recognised to your advantage.

It's 2:33 am, and I am mad about missing all the big raids.

Akri

Sothantos said:

Doesn't that still give him reason to retaliate?

It sure does. Just like infamous ganking infamous also still gives a reason to retaliate later according to HELP INFAMY. I think it's really, really messy like this, once the cause counting starts. Soldiers being open pk was simpler. Not better, but simpler. 

Entaro

Archaeon said:

that doesn't excuse you from me getting payback lol

It's not?  Then my mistake!  I thought once infamy wears off it's the end of it, didn't know you could still return PK favours after the fact. 

Archaeon

well i actually have a special name for it, when you attack someone because you were infamous and so were they and they attacked you.  I call it a 'reach around' because you're reaching around your non-infamy to get to your cause.

Entaro

Akri said:

Sothantos said:

Doesn't that still give him reason to retaliate?

It sure does. Just like infamous ganking infamous also still gives a reason to retaliate later according to HELP INFAMY. I think it's really, really messy like this, once the cause counting starts. Soldiers being open pk was simpler. Not better, but simpler. 

Fair enough. I'll take it back then.  

Akri

Stheno said:

Here's a thought. Rather than waging war like it's one long game of keep-away, where the objective is to starve the fight of as much oxygen as possible until one or both teams can stomp, maybe you could just... wage war? The points are insane enough without everyone and their mother issuing, breaking character to honk about it, and magically appearing once the tank is down after we have to legally scrape together a sanction.

No one likes chasing your no-fun-havers around the map and ganking them, but when you remove avenues of retribution in infamy and retaliation tanks, what is the expected recourse? Just wait for Targossas to rewrite the rules of engagement? Do the same thing, sit on ships and the Inferno to avoid "high-value bounties"?

You can actually change the culture in your city with a little pressure. It's why Mhaldor always defends, well or not, against overwhelming odds, and will refuse to quit the city if we're occupied, which you've clearly recognised to your advantage.

It's 2:33 am, and I am mad about missing all the big raids.

Not gonna lie, I have more fun getting stomped by Targossas' big numbers than sitting on a tank in a near-empty city waiting for it to charge (or guards being placed). I miss when you could take stupid risks and nobody cared if it failed, it made for a lot more interesting fights. I really, really dislike tanks as a central objective in this. WTB Sevet's cat as our boss area and fight over that instead. Let's do it.

[Deleted User]

Part of the problem to me is that there are no extra objectives while in a war than having a scoreboard to remind you of your successes/failures and near constant sanctioning. I think there's too much emphasis on individuals, since their actions (or lack of action) directly lead to the other objectives being achievable. I know some of the "opt in during events" PKers feel cut off from a good chunk of their usual gameplay because they don't want to give up points from their team unintentionally by putting themselves at risk. I wish there were new objectives to take advantage of and strategize around, something to devalue the endless gank-a-thons and bombing contests.

Archaeon

Yeah that's a huge draw back.  Getting shit on by the enemy then getting it later from your friends is a bit like a kick in the balls. Twice

Sothantos

Stheno said:

Here's a thought. Rather than waging war like it's one long game of keep-away, where the objective is to starve the fight of as much oxygen as possible until one or both teams can stomp, maybe you could just... wage war? The points are insane enough without everyone and their mother issuing, breaking character to honk about it, and magically appearing once the tank is down after we have to legally scrape together a sanction.

No one likes chasing your no-fun-havers around the map and ganking them, but when you remove avenues of retribution in infamy and retaliation tanks, what is the expected recourse? Just wait for Targossas to rewrite the rules of engagement? Do the same thing, sit on ships and the Inferno to avoid "high-value bounties"?

You can actually change the culture in your city with a little pressure. It's why Mhaldor always defends, well or not, against overwhelming odds, and will refuse to quit the city if we're occupied, which you've clearly recognised to your advantage.

It's 2:33 am, and I am mad about missing all the big raids.

I get the frustration, but this sort of thing happens everywhere, and they're definitely not Targ-only attitudes or habits. It's especially strange to me to talk about it when Mhaldor is in the lead. At the risk of opening debate on "who was lamer", which I honestly don't care about, it's hardly as if Mhaldor hasn't been doing very similar things, as I've heard sapienced people on party tell people not to defend and give up a sanction, and seen very similarly defensive actions taken.

I don't think 'hole up and take no risks' is something that we can be fairly accused of as a city when we've gone for level twos and lost them when we could have taken safe level one tanks instead. We've also come close to giving up level twos before, such as with the tanks on the lower isles.

You can't control your timezone, but if people are QQing to avoid outnumbered 5am raids, it seems disingenuous to then complain that they don't want to engage you. Personally, I will always engage even on low numbers (see trying to stop you guys from late-night guard bashing with some scrubs early on) but I don't expect that from a bunch of midbies without guidance, and it's not something I've seen from the other side either.

Saonji

@Entaro Stop being reasonable, and bitch like everyone else does. God.

Sothantos

Unrelatedly, I've just discovered that MILLOG is apparently a thing.

Total Time Played: 737 days, 2 hours and 56 minute.

Stheno

@Sothantos To be fair, I'm sure it's a selective set of behaviour I'm seeing due to playtimes. You've been just fine. A mechanical problem becomes a social one, and then we enter the ouroboros of grief.

Akri

Issam said:

Part of the problem to me is that there are no extra objectives while in a war than having a scoreboard to remind you of your successes/failures and near constant sanctioning. I think there's too much emphasis on individuals, since their actions (or lack of action) directly lead to the other objectives being achievable. I know some of the "opt in during events" PKers feel cut off from a good chunk of their usual gameplay because they don't want to give up points from their team unintentionally by putting themselves at risk. I wish there were new objectives to take advantage of and strategize around, something to devalue the endless gank-a-thons and bombing contests.

That's my point, yep! If tanks didn't matter much, or at all, and the entire war revolved around opt-in objectives you can fight over in neutral territory (or let one slide if you're too outnumbered), then it'd be a lot more fun, I think. Even if you're outnumbered you can still try and put up a fight and snatch a few crumbs or score some points however it works, without having to worry that you gave up a sanction or something. Maybe not like the grindfest that was the Reckoning, but something you can fight over for half an hour, to an hour. Kills can still matter a little, but they also shouldn't be the deciding factor, and I don't think they are now.

I just don't like tanks because it sucks to have to force them just to score points, and it sucks that it can be seen as the 'fault' of a few unfortunate individuals. It just sucks just as much that you can't get to participate in the war if you live in the 'wrong' timezone, if you don't. 

Sothantos

Yes, let me purify Enverren and ensla-- I mean liberate Blackrock from Mhaldorian rule.

Minifie

Few things to touch on: If your org is kicking your fellows for giving up sanctions/chastising them for engaging, noose them. I've had a few times in Mdor where someone has been theoren'd for fighting and giving up a sanction to have to turn around and kick the punisher in the testies. Give up sanctions, PK, w/e, just play the damn game.

Why more systems? Different infamy or open pk groups, the rules have been made more convoluted than previous war and already people are trying to find what they can to abuse/prevent loss, and we want more systems/rules et al to try and find more loopholes? I get not everyone wants to pk, but adding in a second infamy system, or trying to shuffle soldiers in/out or citizens and other methods to try and squeeze in more chance to win already shows that simple is going to be best. 

Too much of the focus is on winning, again, the game does a horrible job of expanding on pathways that loss comes with, and coupled with losing sucking makes things like war even shittier, on top of going back to the "yeah you guys are shit, you did this" "well you did this" "nuh but that's fine because (insert excuse here)". I've seen mention a few times about weaponizing issues from logs/sapience/clans and it's just more finding ways to win, after this war no matter who wins both factions should be gut punched by our divine for being such piss-ants about war. 

The war system hasn't reinforced what changes need to be made to the systems, but to the mindsets of not only the players, and somewhat to those above to realign them. 

Sothantos

@Minifie The reason I suggested war infamy was just because of outside interference. Pls free pk everyone without outside interference thank.

Minifie

could tie it to army rank, 5-6 are open PK to the other war target's military. 1-4 works as per normal, then we can mock the wusses who down rank.

Archaeon

Minifie said:

Few things to touch on: If your org is kicking your fellows for giving up sanctions/chastising them for engaging, noose them. 

since apparently timecoded youtube videos don't work.... start at 1:00

Sothantos

Archaeon, it's because you run off on your own and die and give sanction, then ragequit instead of defending.

Caelan

That whole thing with the bank... all i could picture was a Woody Allen-esque clip of a guy trying to squeeze by Aegoth and all the other dragons wedged in the doorway to the bank, "excuuuuse me. Pardon me sir.. I just.. i need to.. this will only be a moment.. I just need a quick withdrawral"

Archaeon

Sothantos said:

Archaeon, it's because you run off on your own and die and give sanction, then ragequit instead of defending.

ok instead of being stupid i'll be productive.  it's because the way you guys want to do this is boring as fuck, i want to defend and fight not just hit when we have an advantage.  both sides do the same thing, it's fucking lame, and we care more about how we can game the system for points than having fun.