@Altheia uhm, no one is saying you can't comment, or make suggestions. All I said is, if you don't like something, don't make blanket statements as if your opinion is somehow indicative of the majority, or even the minority of login trends.
Artifacts or not, skill and knowledge would trump artifact weight.
Everyone is reasonable, and understands when they should attack someone and when they should not.
Every circle has equal amounts of skilled fighters.
For those who like to PK as much as I do; don't grief people, or be overbearing, especially on newer fighters. We have a small player base currently, and I don't get to see as much fighting without being met with an squad nowadays.
Be mindful, be considerate, and above all, have fun!
"More to mind, less to fear, don't let anger interfere."
Heh, maybe it truly wouldn't work, but I'd love to see an attempt to, at the very least, give the truly "I don't like PK" crowd their very own game within IRE, and see how that goes. If there were any PK in that game at all, it really would be very, very rigidly defined. It definitely doesn't solve everything, but at the very least, it does get the people who REALLY don't want to be around it away from the people who at least sort of do.
Of course, many people are interested in PK to at least some degree, but depending on how you view it, many people "want it, but only on their terms". At the very least, you have people who are as different as me and Juran. Both of us consider PK a very important part of the game. But Juran is comfortable with a far more hard core PK scene than I would ever be (for example). That sort of thing doesn't go away.
@Javon with how you just talked back to her, you are doing just that. You pretty much told her that her opinion didn't matter and to not comment. Wouldn't the best course of action to actually read the whole thing and look at this all from the side of someone who doesn't like PK and then making a comment based on that point of view and not your 'PK is fantastic at all times' kind of ideal?
(edit) @Mathiaus those would be a great starting point on the changes for PK rules, if everyone would sit there and actually do just that. However, some people aren't going to agree and get all angry and upset. Then they might complain about how things aren't 'fair' anymore and such.
lol I'm dead. I literally wrote "@Altheia uhm, no one is saying you can't comment, or make suggestions."
Then Naxxremis replied "@Javon with how you just talked back to her, you are doing just that. You pretty much told her that her opinion didn't matter and to not comment."
@Altheia and others. Please stop acting like your opinion is the end all be all. It isn't. There are plenty of people I can name who log in largely for the PK system. Just because YOU don't like it, YOU don't have to participate in it.
Given the fact that no one actually said their opinion was the only opinion, nor did anyone make it seem that way, it kinda does make it seem like you've got issues with anyone that doesn't think 'ZOMG PK SO FUN'.
I believe we've recently encountered some scenarios that provide a good example of why the system needs a rework.
Javon and others have stated "The PK system is optional. Opt out and you'll be fine". By "opting out", you forgo group events and champion status.
Currently, both tutors from Khandava and Antioch are held hostage. Since this allows enemied individuals to enter the cities, the current rash of activity includes enemied individuals wandering around enemied cities, building obstructions, and harassing players. With the gross imbalance of player power levels, there's little an individual can do...and when a group forms to deal with the intruders, the group members are then "marked" for future ganking.
That's pretty griefy. While one or two individuals might find this system entertaining, as a whole it's caused a lot of the less-powerful members to avoid logging in. That's bad for Imperian's health.
Personally, I don't mind the current situation. It adds some tension and keeps those of us interested in combat on our toes.
I had something I wanted to add to that, @Ryse but that would require that I care enough to actually put my thoughts to words. I apologize for not being able to add anything helpful or criticizing towards what you said.
@Altheia and others. Please stop acting like your opinion is the end all be all. It isn't. There are plenty of people I can name who log in largely for the PK system. Just because YOU don't like it, YOU don't have to participate in it.
Coincidentally, the people who do that are often the ones who have the exact views she's talking about.
I believe we've recently encountered some scenarios that provide a good example of why the system needs a rework.
Javon and others have stated "The PK system is optional. Opt out and you'll be fine". By "opting out", you forgo group events and champion status.
Currently, both tutors from Khandava and Antioch are held hostage. Since this allows enemied individuals to enter the cities, the current rash of activity includes enemied individuals wandering around enemied cities, building obstructions, and harassing players. With the gross imbalance of player power levels, there's little an individual can do...and when a group forms to deal with the intruders, the group members are then "marked" for future ganking.
That's pretty griefy. While one or two individuals might find this system entertaining, as a whole it's caused a lot of the less-powerful members to avoid logging in. That's bad for Imperian's health.
Personally, I don't mind the current situation. It adds some tension and keeps those of us interested in combat on our toes.
It's okay, as long as the Magick faction is having a blast.
There is some fantastic irony going on here. Well done.
(Also if people are hunting down same-circle city/council defenders after the fact they are bad and should feel bad.)
I think the problem is, back in the day we had the RAH RAH PK crowd, and we also had the population to support them in that if you were too griefy, either someone from your own side said "hey stop" or someone from a different side griefed you until you chilled out for a while.
We don't have that anymore. We do have a bunch of old players who are snarky about getting griefed off and on over the past ten years, and a lot of them seem to have coalesced in one spot, so not only do they not say "hey stop, we probably shouldn't be so overbearing people quit over it" (and why should they, THEY stuck it out through the hard times), there also isn't really anybody to reliably put the rabid PKers in their place.
Problem is the people who bullied them don't play anymore, they realized being bullies is lame and moved on to another game (as people of that mindset are wont to do), and now we're left with no balance of power via population, and no trickle down pk.
We've really derailed the purpose of this thread, and I'm shocked it hasn't been closed yet, but it comes down to "if you wanna PK, go nuts" "if you wanna issue for that PK, go nuts" it's on the game to police it, ultimately, because the players can't or won't at this point.
There is some fantastic irony going on here. Well done.
(Also if people are hunting down same-circle city/council defenders after the fact they are bad and should feel bad.)
I am super curious about what is going on in game now (and still can't really play). I can only guess something like "griefees become griefers", or some such. Obviously, people are currently bountying same-circle defenders.
As for the second bit. City and council defense seems like exactly the kind of thing that could and mostly should be set in actual stone, and not left up to "players finding the limits of what admin will and will not punish", often also known as "someone probably did it to us at some point, so it's fair game now". The rule could be something like "there can be repercussions for defending a city or council that you are not part of, but that IS part of your circle". Or, "there cannot be repercussions for [that]".
Currently, the fairly set in stone rule is "you can always defend your own city or council with no repercussions". Anything beyond that falls in the "players finding the limits of what admin will and will not punish" category. Although, I have to admit, with more cities and councils at odds with each other (within circles), maybe it does make a certain amount of sense that there is a certain amount of separateness baked in. I wouldn't care which decision was made, and you can very convincingly argue for or against, but this feels like a perfect example of a case where a decision should be made, would bring near perfect clarity to an area of PK where that clarity is supposed to be there in order to encourage people to dip their toes in, knowing they aren't going straight to a deep end. People will sometimes even accept somewhat deeper water, if they at least know how deep it is.
"players finding the limits of what admin will and will not punish"
Admins first have to see what is going on. Only admin I've seen do anything lately is Dec (no offense to any of the admins). It's hard for players to do that when others can get away with murder.
People have issued and have been waiting for a while. (I am not one of them. I just decided to log off and not deal with the idiocy that has started to happen lately)
There's currently only one pending issue filed against a player.
I don't know for sure, but from what I'm gathering is that when issues are given. The response time is extremely late to be resolved or likely an extremely low priority. At least, from what I remember putting up an issue back during the Flame War, I didn't get a response/clarification until like 3 weeks it felt? Though it was definitely a week plus. So I'm thinking that's what he's talking about as well-the response time.
Okay - I have a serious question because this is starting to get on my nerves and I need clarification. I've stopped involving myself in pretty much anything to do with said person because every single time, they constantly come after me and kill me. So, if I act like they aren't there, I hope that I'm left alone.
If said person comes into my Council (they are enemied) and they're literally trolling the Council and attacking my citizens, I'm under the impression that we have a right to fight back and defend the Council and that SAID PERSON does NOT have a right for PK on anyone that is defending the Council.
Is this correct, or incorrect? Because I've got people that are legitimately angry for defending and then being hunted and killed after the fact because 'they performed an aggressive action' on said person, when they were defending the Council.
@Myrcella In other IRE games I have played, you cannot use the defense of being an enemy party being attacked in an enemy city as a plausible reason to kill someone, nor can you go after them after a month real life time to "collect" a kill. I honestly give a rats ass about dying, what I do care about is someone with an ego and a very hostile and nasty personality harassing me via tells when I have confronted him on his behavior. I will not call this person out, because frankly this is likely the only way they get attention.
To further this, I honestly rarely play much because of this certain player and the sheer level of grief. Snubbing does not work, it just simply continues the toxicity of the player. I actually pity them for being so disgusting to other players behind the characters. Simply put, he is likely not going to face reprimand, and the stuff is just gonna keep happening
I was under the impression that if I decided to troll Kinsarmar, and Kinsarmarians attacked me in their Council - that that was it. They attack me as they have a right to defend. I can't turn around and say 'Oh hey, you attacked me while I was trololol-ing you in your City, so now I have PK rights on you while you're bashing in the UW or whatever'. This needs to be clarified because this is exactly what's happening right now.
So I get that and yes you are correct you can NOT do that, however in this instance I am waiting to hear back to argue simply you can't just hold a nearly month long grudge after verbally harassing a player, like it was pretty bad. I don't play much due to this person, and it goes to show here why.
He used the reasoning he was attacked a month ago almost against me then that I "attacked him" for being in the council as an enemy as reasoning. All in all it's just bs reasonings on very very shaky ground. Not that he didn't kill me before for this. So honestly? Until the admin @Jeremy Saunders (and whomever else I don't really know them all) get in on this and set a hard line on acceptable pk scenarios, people (or this person mainly) will continue to do this
@Eoghan see, it's not just an issue that I'm having. It's him causing the issues and us seeing how long issues are taking and then just saying to hell with it, complaining on forums and then just not logging into Imperian all together. Said person is honestly making the game worse and worse for those who aren't apart of the Magick circle or in Kinsarmar. Hell, most of the people I know that normally take champion don't even do it anymore because the moment they take it said person is on them like white on rice (honestly the only analogy I could think of at this moment that didn't involve bad language). It's not just a 'minor' thing at this point. Go take a look at the Quotes thread just for an example of the crap he says to people in tells.
Written by: Jeremy Date: Wednesday, August 9th, 2017 Addressed to: Everyone
You never have the right to kill a player later, if that player attacked you while defending their home city or council.
This goes for formal and informal raids. Formal raids being described in HELP RAIDING. Informal raids are when you enter a city you are enemied to, for any reason at all.
If you are an enemy to a city, enter that city, and are attacked or killed, even if you have not attacked anyone while there, you are considered to be raiding. You cannot seek retribution on the player or players that attack you while in an enemy city.
However, you may attempt to kill anyone that attacks you while you are in an enemy city. However, as stated above, you cannot try to kill them later.
If the defending player decides to continue attacking you outside of the city, or attempts to kill you later for raiding their city, you are then allowed to seek your revenge.
I hope that is clear enough for everyone.
Penned by my hand on the 25th of Artificium, in the year 141 AM.
This needs to be clarified because this is exactly what's happening right now.
This has been clarified a number of times already by the admin. (the above line also wasn't directed at you, for reference. Or anyone who's posted after Javon, really)
This needs to be clarified because this is exactly what's happening right now.
This has been clarified a number of times already by the admin. (the above line also wasn't directed at you, for reference. Or anyone who's posted after Javon, really)
Honestly, I assume that anyone who has posted after him is just referring to him and not anyone else on the board unless they tag them. It makes life easier that way.
I'm not trying to upset any of the admins with me posting this here, but I was told to issue. So @Eoghan, I have submitted my issue. I'm only posting here because I was just informed that one of my councilmates issues expired with no response and I feel that this whole crap that has been going on needs to get resolved and quickly since the issue that my councilmate had was also against the same person I issued.
Comments
- Artifacts or not, skill and knowledge would trump artifact weight.
- Everyone is reasonable, and understands when they should attack someone and when they should not.
- Every circle has equal amounts of skilled fighters.
For those who like to PK as much as I do; don't grief people, or be overbearing, especially on newer fighters. We have a small player base currently, and I don't get to see as much fighting without being met with an squad nowadays.Be mindful, be considerate, and above all, have fun!
"More to mind, less to fear, don't let anger interfere."
Of course, many people are interested in PK to at least some degree, but depending on how you view it, many people "want it, but only on their terms". At the very least, you have people who are as different as me and Juran. Both of us consider PK a very important part of the game. But Juran is comfortable with a far more hard core PK scene than I would ever be (for example). That sort of thing doesn't go away.
(edit) @Mathiaus those would be a great starting point on the changes for PK rules, if everyone would sit there and actually do just that. However, some people aren't going to agree and get all angry and upset. Then they might complain about how things aren't 'fair' anymore and such.
Then Naxxremis replied "@Javon with how you just talked back to her, you are doing just that. You pretty much told her that her opinion didn't matter and to not comment."
Where is this guy getting this stuff, smh.
I would imagine he's going back to your original comment
Given the fact that no one actually said their opinion was the only opinion, nor did anyone make it seem that way, it kinda does make it seem like you've got issues with anyone that doesn't think 'ZOMG PK SO FUN'.
Javon and others have stated "The PK system is optional. Opt out and you'll be fine". By "opting out", you forgo group events and champion status.
Currently, both tutors from Khandava and Antioch are held hostage. Since this allows enemied individuals to enter the cities, the current rash of activity includes enemied individuals wandering around enemied cities, building obstructions, and harassing players. With the gross imbalance of player power levels, there's little an individual can do...and when a group forms to deal with the intruders, the group members are then "marked" for future ganking.
That's pretty griefy. While one or two individuals might find this system entertaining, as a whole it's caused a lot of the less-powerful members to avoid logging in. That's bad for Imperian's health.
Personally, I don't mind the current situation. It adds some tension and keeps those of us interested in combat on our toes.
(Also if people are hunting down same-circle city/council defenders after the fact they are bad and should feel bad.)
We don't have that anymore. We do have a bunch of old players who are snarky about getting griefed off and on over the past ten years, and a lot of them seem to have coalesced in one spot, so not only do they not say "hey stop, we probably shouldn't be so overbearing people quit over it" (and why should they, THEY stuck it out through the hard times), there also isn't really anybody to reliably put the rabid PKers in their place.
Problem is the people who bullied them don't play anymore, they realized being bullies is lame and moved on to another game (as people of that mindset are wont to do), and now we're left with no balance of power via population, and no trickle down pk.
We've really derailed the purpose of this thread, and I'm shocked it hasn't been closed yet, but it comes down to "if you wanna PK, go nuts" "if you wanna issue for that PK, go nuts" it's on the game to police it, ultimately, because the players can't or won't at this point.
As for the second bit. City and council defense seems like exactly the kind of thing that could and mostly should be set in actual stone, and not left up to "players finding the limits of what admin will and will not punish", often also known as "someone probably did it to us at some point, so it's fair game now". The rule could be something like "there can be repercussions for defending a city or council that you are not part of, but that IS part of your circle". Or, "there cannot be repercussions for [that]".
Currently, the fairly set in stone rule is "you can always defend your own city or council with no repercussions". Anything beyond that falls in the "players finding the limits of what admin will and will not punish" category. Although, I have to admit, with more cities and councils at odds with each other (within circles), maybe it does make a certain amount of sense that there is a certain amount of separateness baked in. I wouldn't care which decision was made, and you can very convincingly argue for or against, but this feels like a perfect example of a case where a decision should be made, would bring near perfect clarity to an area of PK where that clarity is supposed to be there in order to encourage people to dip their toes in, knowing they aren't going straight to a deep end. People will sometimes even accept somewhat deeper water, if they at least know how deep it is.
If said person comes into my Council (they are enemied) and they're literally trolling the Council and attacking my citizens, I'm under the impression that we have a right to fight back and defend the Council and that SAID PERSON does NOT have a right for PK on anyone that is defending the Council.
Is this correct, or incorrect? Because I've got people that are legitimately angry for defending and then being hunted and killed after the fact because 'they performed an aggressive action' on said person, when they were defending the Council.
To further this, I honestly rarely play much because of this certain player and the sheer level of grief. Snubbing does not work, it just simply continues the toxicity of the player. I actually pity them for being so disgusting to other players behind the characters. Simply put, he is likely not going to face reprimand, and the stuff is just gonna keep happening
Killing City Defenders
Written by: Jeremy
Date: Wednesday, August 9th, 2017
Addressed to: Everyone
You never have the right to kill a player later, if that player attacked you while defending their home city or council.
This goes for formal and informal raids. Formal raids being described in HELP RAIDING. Informal raids are when you enter a city you are enemied to, for any reason at all.
If you are an enemy to a city, enter that city, and are attacked or killed, even if you have not attacked anyone while there, you are considered to be raiding. You cannot seek retribution on the player or players that attack you while in an enemy city.
However, you may attempt to kill anyone that attacks you while you are in an enemy city. However, as stated above, you cannot try to kill them later.
If the defending player decides to continue attacking you outside of the city, or attempts to kill you later for raiding their city, you are then allowed to seek your revenge.
I hope that is clear enough for everyone.
Penned by my hand on the 25th of Artificium, in the year 141 AM.