Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!


Oystir ✭✭✭


Last Active
  • Re: I HEART

    @Jeremy and @Eoghan. Separate from the forum ranting, I really want to thank you both for all the help and patience you've given me with our communication this year. Especially for our message exchange the other day Eoghan, and of course Jeremy whose on the ground workload I can only imagine is staggering and who still makes time to like, approve customisations and fix mistakes from 6 months ago and change properties on chairs and whatever else other people want in this world. 
  • Re: Raiding

    My point was quite that quality of fighters is irrelevant to the necessity of some change being made. I'm down for your suggestion or something similar with a heavy dose of cynicism that it'd be implemented. I'm down for not being woken up at 4pm and I'd love for the 'once a month' thing to change to '24-hours' so I can go to sleep without having to check if it's the 8th of Vita or the 18th of Vita.

    The way I see it, if no benefit is given to a smaller team, raids will continue to be Team Size vs. Team Size off-hours event (unless somebody decides to be gallant and good sportsmen and not abuse mechanics/loopholes in mechanics which I think we both know went out the window as soon as raiding was introduced), actively creating a strategic advantage to use the mechanic when as few people as possible can participate - actively discouraging anything resembling a fair fight numbers-wise. 
    Raid defense will continue to be disproportionately determined by 'can my NPCs kill you? y/n' which, as Cyr wisely alluded to, is not something to be scoffed at but also not something that a large number of individuals in the game cannot deal with. 

    With the majority of people you're going to want another person who can intelligently target an enemy over hoping aggro procs go well for you. If I have to ask Curran to sit out because I and 2 friends want a healing buff, it is a much smaller price to pay than ignoring the raid and just continuing to bash Demon's Pass and letting Curran go for it solo until she gives up because people who are more continuously involved dgaf about the raid because we know through experience that it's a waste of time to bother. Your method says that there has to be enough people to win a fight to make raid defense possible, mine creates some wiggle room for the inevitable times when there are not with a window of 1-2 people where defending team decides if another fighter is worth the cost of X benefit. 3 fighters w/ healing or 4 fighters w/o healing? Depends on the person and again creates like a strategy for defenders and raiders both to care about something other than playing when the fewest number of people are online to defend. 

    Edit: Your method IE making no changes. 
  • Re: Raiding

    I see the existence of a PK-dominant faction who is also able to decide when a fight occurs with nothing that exists to resist either aspect of that fact. I'm not mad that your team is better. I'm not mad that your team can pick when fights happen. I'm mad that the reality of these two facts are real enough for you to utilize to your advantage in multiple raids on one hand while you say 'eh itll happen' on the other without any acknowledgement that it might be a problem worth addressing.
  • Re: Raiding

    Right but you seem to miss the point or seem intent on ignoring the point that the raiding team has complete control over their team and the defending* teams gets whatever they have online and whoever they can metagame into logging on in a 15 minute window. Your deck is already stacked because of the quality of the people you have and that has absolutely nothing to do with the kind of balancing that is being requested or that is necessary in this mechanic if it's going to work outside of these kinds of numbers games.

    You raided Khandava when they had 3 people earlier, we raided you when you had 2 visible players and you returned the favor. When exactly do you think we're going to come back for our objectives? Logically and strategically it's going to be when we believe you're going to lose and logically and strategically that means there is going to be an inherent disadvantage to your team, otherwise we're wasting our time. Literally small groups of defenders need to have mechanical advantage or there will be no motivation to ever do anything but that. 
    Post edited by Oystir on
  • Re: Raiding

    Doublepost idc im drunk and you woke me up

    this isn't like me wanting to win every time. it's me not wanting to be steamrolled every time or get a phone call at 3:45 am cause that's when you decide to raid and no number of people awake at that hour can do anything about it except flail and die, even when one of our best PKers are online. i don't care about losing, i care about wasting my time on mechanics that are, at best, frustrating and at worst, impossible to actually play with. That's why I didn't care when you took the statue after 6 days of dealing with constant guard bugs during constant raids and why its taking a lot of energy to give a squirt about caravans anymore (and leylines but that's just because surges are still firing off of half of my bashing combo). I reference myself from the viewpoint of the raiders arguing in favor of these changes because I think it's kind of crap to be able to use timezones as an advantage(1) and I think it's crap to intentionally abuse that, even when it resulted in my own team's victory. '

    Edit: (1) Use timezones as the primary advantage