Raiding Clarifications
I absolutely hate adding PK rules to HELP PK. However, we do have some rules for raiding cities and I want to clarify things. None of this should be new to you. Before I post this in HELP PK I want to open it to discussion here.
8) Cities and councils are considered defender zones. If you attack a city, you cannot retaliate later for any actions taken against you (or any loyal mobs) while are you in that city. If you defend your city by attacking a raider, the raider may then attack you. However, you cannot be retaliated against later unless you pursue the fight outside of the city. Attacking players cannot kill players in cities unless they have valid RP reasons. Raiding a city opens an attacker for PK, but if that PK occurs outside of the city, the defender is no longer immune to retaliation.
This includes doing things like leaving your mobs in a city waiting for someone to kill them so you have a reason to kill them later. I have no problem with leaving your loyal mobs around in an attempt to bait people to kill them so you can PK them later, but leaving them in a city is the same as raiding that city. You can attack them right then, in the city, but not later, outside of the city.
0
Comments
Kryss engages
Ruga runs.
Ruga screams I am teh defender.
10m later.
Technically. Kryss is in the wrong. On the flip side, Ruga is being a dong and gaming the system. We all do it so there's no point in lying about it. It's standard strategy for city defense.
Look, Selthis is being a dong in the Khandava forest. Wytchen#5 drop a vortex for Selthis. I block his way out of the forest as we pull him into defend range. TECHNICALLY, Selthis was just outside raid range. We coaxed him into violating it. Unless you investigate this and see that I'm being a complete terd, Selthis loses the issue when he kills me later. That's a ton of work on your part considering this is going to be standard pk until there's some way to add a punishment for losing at raiding to dissuade you from doing it 24/7.
Edit: Also!
People go into cities to kill with a list of priority targets. "Ruga is a dong." "Arakis slept with my wife." "Aulani has guard privs." Honestly, if you're a security minister/aide I think you should be fair game. You've got the power to break and raid and issue pk reasons (albeit terrible ones). If you want the responsibility to enemy/bounty/move guards, you should really enjoy the target on your head when the thugs from down south ride up into your turf.
That being said, to avoid confusion on who is a security aide, just add a new line to help <city>.
The following people are in charge of the defense of <>: Ruga, Aulani, Steve.
Not sure if this is a solid idea, but it makes sense right now.
The second part is quite more grey. Or maybe gray. Something.
Stavenn is being gamed as much as they're gaming. Don't get me wrong, some of these issues are 100% legitimate complaints. On the other hand, some of these issues are crap, based in crap and the defender is being as much of a bag of dongs as the raiders.
Edit: Forget this, I remember now when Antioch's ferry led to siege.
It seems fine to me. The only quibble I have with it is basically that I don't know what's considered as "in the city." Are we talking about that gray area where you're not IN the city but I'm still allowed to pull you into guards? Or are we talking about the actual city limits?
Personally, I think that defender immunity should end at the gates unless they're actively attacking people through the gates. But what if Kryss is tooling around outside the gates with vortex and we defend? Is that still no-retaliation defense? It's not in the city.
Unclear PvP rules like that lead to a sort of "Issue them all and let the Gods sort them out" response from the cities, and I hate that kind of thing. I imagine you're not too fond of mass issues, either. A bit of clarity on that front would be nice.,
"On the battlefield I am a god. I love war. The steel, the smell, the corpses. I wish there were more. On the first day I drove the Northmen back alone at the ford. Alone! On the second I carried the bridge! Me! Yesterday I climbed the Heroes! I love war! I… I wish it wasn’t over."
I'd honestly like to see some sort of penalty for frivolous issues at this point, something like an entire level lost or something.
The problem with this is that it can scare people away from making legitimate issues because they're afraid of being punished if they lose them, and that's a fairly big problem.
Don't get me wrong. I have no problem with people like Shaylei who do the whole "I swear like a drunken sailor with Tourette's but issue for saying 'damn' in my presence" thing getting punished for spurious issues. That's just 100% abuse of issues and gaming the system.
"On the battlefield I am a god. I love war. The steel, the smell, the corpses. I wish there were more. On the first day I drove the Northmen back alone at the ford. Alone! On the second I carried the bridge! Me! Yesterday I climbed the Heroes! I love war! I… I wish it wasn’t over."
I'd still like to see some steps taken to eliminate some of these crappy issues. There's little or no drawback to pk anymore, so I'm really wondering 'why' there's so much issuing being thrown around for pk. The people who 'abuse' are people who definitely know better. A lot of the time they do it rapid fire so they have 2-120 bad issues in a row. If there was a reason to dissuade people from shot gun issuing, it'd make people think twice before firing off that ol' rage issue from Charon's boat. (ideally)
To clean up a lot of grey area and 'abuse', I think we may need to have a little forum pow-wow and discuss removing command abilities or at least removing the commands like
Blocking/Embargo on the gates is raiding.
I would maybe add some 2-3 rooms directly out of the gate a safe place, so you can engage people battering the gate or trying to vortex people. You take a step outside that area willingly to engage someone, and you are free to retaliation. Doing ranged combat, including doing lure/beckon/vortex, even from these safe rooms, also makes you open to ganking.
Tough, best long term solution for people that camp? Ignore them.
The best way to beat a raid or a violent doorknocker is to sit and ignore them. Starve them out. Is it 'good RP'? Probably not, no, but RP more likely than not will get you killed, and if you don't want to die, so why would you willingly walk in to that situation? Most issues these days could be solved by the plantiff/issuing party just being intelligent enough not to involve themselves in the situation.