Howdy, Stranger!

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

Sect(shrine)-wars - clearing out the greyzones.

2

Comments

  • GjarrusGjarrus Member, Beta Testers Posts: 683 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November 2018
    I've had a lot here and a couple edits, but it boiled down to this:

    What I'd Do:
    4-room shrine distance minimum for same sect. Increase bonuses and costs.
    Relic balance pass with new limitations to AoE relics in mind.
    Limit opposed shrines to one per sect.
    Increase sanc lockout timer to 8 hours.
    Increase Bulwark duration to 2 hours.
    Create a 1-game-year shrine rubble at a destroyed shrine, preventing the construction of one there.

  • ElrithElrith Member Posts: 47 ✭✭
    edited November 2018
    @Kalynthari

    You still discuss all of this from the perspective of this very current sect war, no? I ask you again, you like this current system?

    Please tell me how anyone lost and when and how then? Do you seriously say that flame lost and then tried to continue the conflict because the players who are in flame are bad losers?

    Do you say that there is massive RP around Hunger attacking Flame? What kind of RP did this current sect war bring to the table? You should consider your own words to me when we discussed these things and you know that I am fully aware of people emotions towards some players and this has basically 0 to do with sect wars, it is way more personal. 

    And on your comments on war.... So basically what you are saying is that war works like this. You start one and then yield because you couldn't kill the enemy quick enough and then just give up and say "ok sorry was only kidding". Then you do it again and they just forgive you again saying "no worries, we know that you only tried". ???? :confused:

    I hardly play this game only to PK, but I accept that PK is a major thing in this game and I wouldn't dream of starting sect wars and all kinds of things and then blame others to be awful for killing Elrith. Nor would I start to PK random people in a org just because I am mad of what someone else did months irl before. 

    @Kabaal Interesting points. I am also leaning towards Naruj's ideas about limiting shrines in areas because currently there is simply so many in a area that it's hard to maintain management on a decent level. You'd want to keep the window as conflict center though? I like the idea of new shrine on that location for a IG year most I think, it would prevent the constant build up / take down aspect somewhat.
    SwaleAnarys
  • NarujNaruj Member, Beta Testers Posts: 158 ✭✭✭
    Gjarrus said:
    Create a 1-game-year shrine rubble at a destroyed shrine, preventing the construction of one there.

    This is an interesting idea. I would definitely consider this one.
    You grabbed my hand and we fell into it
    Like a daydream.. or a fever
    ElrithJalaras
  • SwaleSwale Member Posts: 312 ✭✭✭
    edited November 2018
    Elrith said:


    @Kabaal Interesting points. I am also leaning towards Naruj's ideas about limiting shrines in areas because currently there is simply so many in a area that it's hard to maintain management on a decent level. You'd want to keep the window as conflict center though? I like the idea of new shrine on that location for a IG year most I think, it would prevent the constant build up / take down aspect somewhat.
    I think daily drain should stay very, very high (even with less shrines, which I would like).  This is so that sects can die a natural death.  I wish all orgs worked that way, actually (can realistically die, and news ones be created).  

    EDIT:  On what Elrith alludes to about this war being personal.  I suspected that the last war had a strong personal aspect... Any major shrine war actually tends to be pretty personal.  Because the stakes are just about as high as you can go.  I do not doubt this time.  This war is DEEPLY personal (I think in particular towards the sect leader), and those are always the absolute nastiest.  
  • ElrithElrith Member Posts: 47 ✭✭
    Agreed @Swale on sects. Sect who have 0 members active enough to maintain faith should of course decay and die. Imo daily drain should remain equal so if you cut down numbers of shrines / X then multiply the daily upkeep with equal number.

    For other orgs, nah, I don't agree with that. You cannot really know when an org is having their prime and not, sometimes org X is strongest sometimes org Z. There is simply too much work with it to be destroyed if you ask me. 
  • SwaleSwale Member Posts: 312 ✭✭✭
    Oh yeah, we're not really set up for it.  We're the opposite of set up for a system like that.  To be honest though, just look at the amount of work that went into Conquest... Conquest was a true empire.  So, I don't know.  
  • KalynthariKalynthari Member Posts: 278 ✭✭✭
    Elrith said:
    @Kalynthari

    You still discuss all of this from the perspective of this very current sect war, no? I ask you again, you like this current system?
    Not really; the same conversation's been rehashed basically every time a sect has had a war. War systems in general are flawed, not because of the system but because of people's ego making them unwilling to accept a loss. Or unwillingness to back down when they relent. See: below comments.

    Please tell me how anyone lost and when and how then? Do you seriously say that flame lost and then tried to continue the conflict because the players who are in flame are bad losers?
    Yes. I don't need to say it, though, they prove it often enough. I'll concede that it's not just flame, but they stick out like a sore thumb.

    Do you say that there is massive RP around Hunger attacking Flame? What kind of RP did this current sect war bring to the table? You should consider your own words to me when we discussed these things and you know that I am fully aware of people emotions towards some players and this has basically 0 to do with sect wars, it is way more personal.
    Anytime you play the game, it's RP. This is an RP game. Maybe you should try interacting with them and see why they're doing it, instead of coming to the forums to find out why. Again, this is an RP game. Go out and RP.

    And on your comments on war.... So basically what you are saying is that war works like this. You start one and then yield because you couldn't kill the enemy quick enough and then just give up and say "ok sorry was only kidding". Then you do it again and they just forgive you again saying "no worries, we know that you only tried". ???? :confused:
    Nope. It's a game, though. You should maybe try and treat it more like one. Nobody said you can't do it back to them; you need to learn when enough's enough, though. Again, this is a game, that you play with other people. Please stop trying to twist my words to fit your own agenda.

    I hardly play this game only to PK, but I accept that PK is a major thing in this game and I wouldn't dream of starting sect wars and all kinds of things and then blame others to be awful for killing Elrith. Nor would I start to PK random people in a org just because I am mad of what someone else did months irl before.
    Interestingly don't see you do much more than PK. You tried talking to me IG once and it was immediately OOC after one sentence. Doesn't help your cause very much.

    Jalaras
  • JalarasJalaras Member Posts: 63
    edited November 2018
    I get the impression that this pointed towards something I raised in an issue that I found to be, yes, a grey area of pk when I was frantically searching through the terrible helpfiles regarding anything of pk around sect wars. To which there were none and HELP PK doesn't give me specific and full details I require, because again, no two people read or understand information the EXACT same way as the next nor is it interpreted the same way, nor even as obvious to others as not to some.  I do however agree with the proposals and comments surrounding this to make it a fun mechanic to experience for someone like myself who is not familiar with how Imperian works. I don't agree with the fact that due to responsibilities by sect leaders involving their sect in a war that is extremely draining and slow, in that being pk'd long after defile/sanc CD's are in play and/or desecrations have stopped should be "ok". Not all wish or have the desire to be fine with it while doing other things such as pve for personal reasons like dailycredits goals, sect faith building etc.. There do need to be stricter limitations around that. I also don't agree with allowing one's "rp" be the sole reason for it to be ok to murder anyone(for any reason). That's allowing others who actually wants to do that, put themselves in the same griefing style of rp as the person with that kind of rp, and with that logic as a strong possibility it makes playing that much more undesirable and chance for members being targeted who wants nothing to do with it or only during times when pk during the defile/sanct/desecration that much more loathing and interested in doing ANYTHING in Imperian.

    Have to admit, the mechanic is rather terrible but on a side note, avoid griefing people who have nothing to do with the sect wars with stupid firewalls on the way to their home, it only just makes the case much more valid as to how terrible the system is and how people use their rp to abuse it. That's just my take on things, some of us want to have fun with it, but keep it tasteful at least with it. By the by, people like Septus are not going to be interested in this-its pure garbage, and I clearly can see as to why they wouldn't bother with something like this again.
    Elrith
  • SwaleSwale Member Posts: 312 ✭✭✭
    Jalaras said:

    in that being pk'd long after defile/sanc CD's are in play and/or desecrations have stopped should be "ok". 
    How long should people have after a defile to come after you?  What if you start to help regularly?  Does that make a difference to you?  I am curious what some people are thinking on this.  I have a feeling that you are possibly as unfamiliar to the rougher side of IRE conflict systems as I once was, and make no mistake, sects/orders are designed to be about as rough as it gets (but not necessarily a wild west).    
  • NarujNaruj Member, Beta Testers Posts: 158 ✭✭✭
    Kalynthari said:
    Please tell me how anyone lost and when and how then? Do you seriously say that flame lost and then tried to continue the conflict because the players who are in flame are bad losers?
    Yes. I don't need to say it, though, they prove it often enough. I'll concede that it's not just flame, but they stick out like a sore thumb.
    I am newly returned to the game, and curious what you consider a clear victory.

    A lot of times in these games, one organization declares war on another organization with the intent to do as much damage as possible. They gain ground initially, because the other side isn't organized. They'll raid a few times, or destroy shrines - even clear an entire area before declaring victory and having a parade.

    But without a clearly stated objective or intent, the war isn't over until both sides stop fighting. When the other side organizes and starts to actually fight back, the first org will commonly cry foul like this about being a poor loser 'because it's over and we already won'.
    You grabbed my hand and we fell into it
    Like a daydream.. or a fever
  • KalynthariKalynthari Member Posts: 278 ✭✭✭
    edited November 2018
    Swale said:
    How long should people have after a defile to come after you?  What if you start to help regularly?  Does that make a difference to you?  I am curious what some people are thinking on this.  I have a feeling that you are possibly as unfamiliar to the rougher side of IRE conflict systems as I once was, and make no mistake, sects/orders are designed to be about as rough as it gets (but not necessarily a wild west).    
    Personally speaking (I dunno about others) who it is, or how often they help, is irrelevant to me. If it wasn't done within a reasonable timeframe, they get left alone until I can catch them doing ****. If I know for sure who was defiling, I bounty them, simple as that. Using bounties for their intended purpose eliminates the whole "unreasonable timeframe" hogwash people throw around.

    Naruj said:
    I am newly returned to the game, and curious what you consider a clear victory.
    This is entirely dependent on the people in play. Not really something that can be flat out answered, generally speaking a victory is when the other side admits defeat. Or have nothing left to take, if they wanna be stubborn and refuse to admit it despite being reduced to having nothing. Alternatively, make a public post or something about it. It's part of what the newsboard is there for. Antagonistic RP is fun when it's done right, and not done purely to be a dickbag.
    eta for clarification: The losing side doesn't necessarily have to be the ones that admit defeat. If they wanna be stubborn then announce their defeat for them. It's not exactly an uncommon thing. If they're constantly losing, have zero shrines or what have you, then you've won. Announce your victory. It's really not that hard.

    A lot of times in these games, one organization declares war on another organization with the intent to do as much damage as possible. They gain ground initially, because the other side isn't organized. They'll raid a few times, or destroy shrines - even clear an entire area before declaring victory and having a parade.

    But without a clearly stated objective or intent, the war isn't over until both sides stop fighting. When the other side organizes and starts to actually fight back, the first org will commonly cry foul like this about being a poor loser 'because it's over and we already won'.
    Personally I'd consider the 'war' to be a new one at this point, if it was already declared to be over. Not the same one. But yes it's been a recurring problem due to the aforementioned ego/stubbornness. Not just in Imperian. It's why war systems just don't work here, no matter how they're setup. People have a hard time admitting they've lost despite it being painfully obvious.

  • GjarrusGjarrus Member, Beta Testers Posts: 683 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November 2018
    For me, team fights every 5h on top of everything else is just too much, especially when you consider it's potentially staggered over multiple shrines and attackers then the potential of desecration (which is an eh mechanic but I don't have good suggestions for it right now). Cutting the frequency down and increasing the opt-out window helps mitigate that.

    There are a few reasons I want to add a minimum distance. First, it cuts down the nonsense stacking of AoE shrines. Second, it should come with a tweak to the immunity formula, so only deep shrines end up getting it. Third, it opens up more space, making it easier for new/smaller sects to get prime real estate. Fourth, fewer shrines means you can cut the number of opposed shrines, further narrowing the window.

    RoE for shrine stuff has always been simple to me. After it's over, you can bounty anyone who defiled your shrine or anyone who opposed a defile that isn't a member of that sect.
  • JalarasJalaras Member Posts: 63
    edited November 2018
    Swale said:
    Jalaras said:

    in that being pk'd long after defile/sanc CD's are in play and/or desecrations have stopped should be "ok". 
    How long should people have after a defile to come after you?  What if you start to help regularly?  Does that make a difference to you?  I am curious what some people are thinking on this.  I have a feeling that you are possibly as unfamiliar to the rougher side of IRE conflict systems as I once was, and make no mistake, sects/orders are designed to be about as rough as it gets (but not necessarily a wild west).    
    My thinking perhaps is maybe 15-30 minutes after its said is done is fine and it matters not if anyone helps regularly. Point being is regardless of what is going on at that time of conflict, when its over or people give up actively defiling/sancting at that shrine in the area its in, 15-30 minutes after the defense/offense should be ok to still pk someone for actively taking part in the defile/sanct windows. Let it go and go about doing something else. Bounty on you would/should override that 15-30 minutes.
  • SwaleSwale Member Posts: 312 ✭✭✭
    edited November 2018
    I'll start by saying that you usually won't be hunted after a window for defending your own shrines, in an established network. That said, Flame learned that... our guys actually can be hunted for that. Currently at least, that's an exception (but it is 'legal'). I see a more legitimate "we're not going to treat this like defense" when two sects are building competitively in an area, and neither sect had a strong presence in the area to start with. I think at that point, "defending" vs. "on the offensive" become mostly irrelevant.

    I was afraid there was this sort of misconception. To be fair, the reason for this is partly... lack of any real written guidance. But in no IRE is a shrine war "I was an active participant in a shrine battle just a bit ago, but you didn't manage to grab me before I went and idled in my city a bit, so, I am going to go hunt now, and you'd best not bother me. LOL, see you at next window"! That is how some systems work, but not all.

    As for bounties, for starters, bounties get abused quite a bit, and Kalynthari knows that very well. 

    You CAN bounty in a shrine war, but unlike with say, "raided our fair city", or "attacked our obelisk", you're not necessarily strictly bound to the bounty system (even there, you can often kill them and re-bounty if there are multiple offenses). Being pretty strictly bound to the bounty system for raids and obelisks serves two purposes. Raids and obelisks (for example) are both very inclusive systems, and so it's nice to have exceedingly clear consequences, that are hopefully acceptable to many players. 

    A bounty system makes that nice and neat. And, yes, it also theoretically gives you quite a lot of time to hunt the person. This can be sort of necessary with a bounty. Because when you bounty someone... they know "I am bountied". That said, bounties tend to clear at things like shard falls (or the next shrine window). You also can only have a single bounty on someone at a time. They are pretty meaningless, for the most part, and that is actually intentional. Bounties exist to make negative consequences very, very minimal, and very, very clear. 

    Shrine wars really are a different animal than those systems, in every way. More generally, the very, very safe, conservative estimate I was always given for how long you'd normally have to hunt someone per single 'offense' anywhere outside the bounty system, has always been "two RL days". More than that is certainly pushing an envelope. 

    But from what I can tell, some of the people playing right now don't know what to expect, and to be fair, there is a big lack of published information like that, and while it's true that it's hard to make hard and fast -rules-, the lack of guidelines is very frustrating and confusing for anyone not totally immersed. The result, I think is that we have people right now who think that they shouldn't be bothered even an hour or so later, which blows my mind a little bit, but is... actually kind of understandable. They can slowly get educated through the issue system (maybe) but it would be nice if they could just read up a bit, and have realistic ideas about what to expect before getting involved.
  • RokasRokas Member Posts: 164 ✭✭✭
    edited November 2018
    Shrines don't strike me as a fun mechanic as they are, and I don't think it's necessarily a good idea to force sects into PK mode as sects seem to be an attempt at a roleplay mechanic. Not everyone is going to have the fighters to properly engage in a war, especially since there aren't any built in limitations to what a war looks like or when it starts and ends.

    I personally would like to see shrines changed to work more like Lusternia where there is one shrine built up and then its influence is spread throughout an area with a limit of like 15 rooms that must be connected.

    The direction of changes that I'd make:

    - Limit shrines per area (probably 1, maybe 2)
    - A shrine has a max influence of 15 rooms
    - No room can be fully defiled if doing so would disconnect another influenced room from the shrine
    - Each room takes x amount of essence to fully sanctify or defile
    - The benefits of a shrine are shared area-wide, but at a percentage relative to how fully sanctified the shrine is.
       - A shrine with 15 fully influenced rooms would give 100% power.
       - A shrine with only 10 influenced rooms could, at best, give 66% power assuming each room is fully sanctified.
       - A shrine with no influenced rooms gives no area-wide benefit.
    - No influenced room can be adjacent to another influenced room of another sect, aka there must be a one-room barrier.

    Obviously, above isn't a fully fleshed out idea as it doesn't take into account relics or shrine commodities, and that is where I'm struggling. At the moment, I would say the following:

    - Relics are no longer dropped from corpses
    - Shrine commodities are used to create relics
    - A shrine can be invested with up to 10 relics with a cooldown per relic invested (12 hours? 8 hours?).
    - A fully defiled shrine crumbles, enabling non-sect members to steal 1 relic per time period (12 hours? 8 hours?).
    - A crumbled shrine decays after a time period when there are no relics.
    - A sect member can remove relics from a shrine for some cost (faith? shrine comms?)


    Some relics would be useless under this system, and I'm okay with that. Some could be integrated as powers that need activated, but for the ones that are intended to affect a small amount of rooms around a shrine, I think revisiting the concept of an idol would be worthwhile. An idol could function similarly to how a shrine does today and only have a few rooms of influence. I think they should require being sanctified to be active, but again with no cooldown so that they can easily be raised or destroyed. Maybe double the cost of an idol raised outside of a shrine's influence? I don't think an idol should be fully protected by a shrine, but the idea of weakening an influenced room as far as it can go without breaking it before being allowed to defile an idol seems like it could work.

    The goal of my idea is to reduce the grind that is shrines. Raising a shrine should be easy just as defiling one should be, while the grindy bits shouldn't be as heavily punished. Defending a shrine is made easier because of the fully-broken rule: a defender can walk in, sanctify an adjacent room once to prevent the current room that's being defiled from being fully destroyed, but at the same time, said room is only one defile away from being broken. Even if a shrine is fully defiled, if it's not ignored, the loss is only 1 relic and perhaps having another shrine's influence take over the rooms that were used previously.

    Above doesn't really solve the question of what is and isn't a war, but I think a mechanic that's a tug of war between sanctifying and defiling would be good. Arbitrary example with arbitrary numbers: the first sect to reach +100 points wins, and points are earned by +2 for defiling and +1 for sanctifying with a 24hr-cap of +25 points earned to prevent one-day winners. Winners get something for winning (enjoy a percentage of the area bonuses of the conquered sect?). There would be a cooldown period between wars, and there should be a non-PK, medium-effort means for a losing sect to "recover" from their loss that nullifies the advantage the winning sect earned.

    AsmundHyperionusJalaras
  • JalarasJalaras Member Posts: 63
    Well, I've personally stated my pov about it, and its not going to change that its a terrible mech and give too much free reign. So I'll just have to be one of those people who will not be bothered with it after the defile/sanct windows close if that's how it will be upheld honestly. Imperian is just a pass time while doing rl stuff, nothing more to me.
  • SwaleSwale Member Posts: 312 ✭✭✭
    edited November 2018
    That is totally fine, and is how many players view MUDs.  Some eventually get more invested/serious - and sect conflict is probably the deep end of that (too deep for the moment, even for the hard core enthusiasts - though not because of the PK aspect, per se).  
  • MereisMereis Member Posts: 229 ✭✭✭
    Yeah, I don't get the "There is NO RP" argument. There was plenty of RP to be had with this war.

    In case you didn't know (probably not; for some reason, I get the impression that there's a faint barrier of separation between Kinsarmar and the rest of the player orgs), just a few weeks before the Flame-Coalition war, there was a smaller war between Hunger and Leechwood over shrines in Erorag.

    It was pretty engaging. It prompted a handful of movement between Ithaqua and Antioch. It reinvigorated relations between Unspeakable and Leechwood. It opened up opportunities for both sides to set goals, and finally it allowed for negotiations including interactions with Keyrix directly.

    Overall, it pretty much allowed for diplomatic relations to open between the AM and Demonic sects, and this eventually led to the consensus that Flame was the bigger enemy to focus on (which, in turn, led to the coalition for this current war).

    If Flame is feeling left out of the RP side of things, they should reach out. It doesn't even need to be a peaceful reaching out. Set reasonable goals. Anything beyond the current"lol u sux at combats" from both sides is better.

    It'll also open up avenues for future negotiations, as is what happened between Leechwood and Hunger.
    currently tentatively active
    (may vanish for periods of time)
    AnarysCordiliaAlvetta
  • OhmOhm Member Posts: 332 ✭✭✭
    Oh, there is RP - even as a very non-RP oriented person, I had a chance to RP with @Anarys on getting her to make Ohm's armor in return for defiling. It is a neat case of 'enemy of my enemy is a friend'
    image
    Anarys
  • MereisMereis Member Posts: 229 ✭✭✭
    And despite Khandava presenting a united front, we still have some vehement anti-anti-magickers! @Sroath I see u
    currently tentatively active
    (may vanish for periods of time)
    Anarys
  • GaltGalt Member, Beta Testers Posts: 278 ✭✭✭
    edited November 2018
    Out of curiosity, how is it that people claim Flame lost last time?

    Last I checked, most of the then-hollow players got so mad they retired or quit, causing hollow to drop down to being a cult, with no shrines at all. Flame, on the other hand, gained plenty of shrines. Despite repeated attempts to claim flame was somehow toxic and awful, I've yet to see a single concrete example of such - Evidently, to certain people, not rolling over and embracing defeat when they ask is toxic. 

    Further, people like to point at flame and say "Soandso quit because of you", which is ridiculous - Anyone who retired chose to, of their own accord. No one was harassed, no one was griefed, no one was even really bothered much outside of the sect conflict, so if they opted to then retire or quit, that's entirely on them. 

    EDIT: also, mega lol at Anarys calling flame tiresome, whiny idiots. We aren't the ones who ragequit the game over a shrine conflict. You were.
    Post edited by Galt on
  • AnarysAnarys Member Posts: 42 ✭✭✭
    Galt said:
    Out of curiosity, how is it that people claim Flame lost last time?

    EDIT: also, mega lol at Anarys calling flame tiresome, whiny idiots. We aren't the ones who ragequit the game over a shrine conflict. You were.
    Losing:
     I am of the vast opinion that Flame did not lose last time - I am of the vast option that either Flame won, or everyone lost because we all got so tired of the crying on the forums and the generic lack of anything on Flame's side (RP, especially).

    Anarys namecalling:
    I feel like you're confusing me with my character. I think you're all weird people who don't know how to resolve a situation. Anarys thinks you're boring children. See the difference there? I left last time because as most people on AM know, I tried to kill myself and was overwhelmed with the bad choices I was making in life and had to be hospitalized for suicidal tendencies and ideation. For the record, Anarys -still- thinks Flame is a bunch of tiresome, whniy idiots - except for @Pellerin, whom she thinks is misled by @Galt.

    Thanks for assuming, though! :wink:
    CordiliaAsmund
  • NarujNaruj Member, Beta Testers Posts: 158 ✭✭✭
    It's good fun, and there wouldn't be anything else to do if we weren't fighting over shrines.
    You grabbed my hand and we fell into it
    Like a daydream.. or a fever
    AnarysCordiliaAsmund
  • SwaleSwale Member Posts: 312 ✭✭✭
    I don't know about good fun.  Not many people like shrine wars overall. Almost zero people who have really fought one, it seems like.  There can be fun parts.   

    Wow, I am sorry to hear that Anarys.  Doesn't get much more serious than that.

    Kalynthari was beating Elrith over the head with a y u no rp stick, and so Elrith just pointed out that we didn't see a lot of RP, if that is so important to the other side.  The obvious example people often start with is the trusty public news post, I guess.

    That said in a conflict like this I think the war pretty much is the RP, if you want to call it that  (and eventually, usually some negotiation).  That conflict is usually driven by "let's really stir this pot" or "I really don't like some of the players in this org, I think we can do some real damage to them". 

    It's awfully hard for me to buy that shrine wars that take place in probably the most sensitive area in the game (DP) are even capable of being this "yeah, we RP that we're trying to totally destroy each other and we get up at weird hours to fight over some of the biggest player investments in IRE, but we don't really mean it as players".  It might be possible to have a shrine war like that in some areas?  I have doubts.  Anyway, I don't bash much, so I don't care about DP, but then again I do, in the sense that I recognize its significance, and attacking an area like that is a sort of message itself. 

    I'm not sure what RP (in the way that I think people mean that) during a war like this would look like.  For example, unless you are a sect that really doesn't fight, you'd likely not ask "y u defile shrinez?!  In the same way that if you get jumped as a player it's pretty frowned upon to ask "What did I do"?

    Anarys' kidnapping example gets at the heart of the point I am trying to make.  Something like that  would outright require a pretty friendly ooc friendship/all players involved having a very strong rapport, because for starters, it's a totally non-mechanical thing.  You can't actually kidnap a character. On the kidnapper end, you're going out of your way to sort provide a "starring role" to the person who is kidnapped.  Also, those players would all be stuck with each other.  For hours. Days? Heh.

    Anecdote: I recently mis-telled to someone who... I have just really not sent tells to, and I usually don't do that period, and it turned I was pre-snubbed, and I have to admit, I am still giggling every time I think about it.
    Anarys
  • ElrithElrith Member Posts: 47 ✭✭
    Ok as a starter of this thread I will assume the role of moderator in terms of trying to bring it back into what I intended before it side-tracked.

    So far I've gathered the following:

    Shrines are not a fun mechanism to do conflict about. This is because of either
    1. To many shrines, there is simply no easy  / fun time managing them. And they are not important enough to care about. Limit them down to X per area? Make a mastershrine? Something that doesn't resolve around spending tons of comms + time guarding each of them.
    2. People go back and forth every 5 hours (depending on relics) and then there is nothing.

    PK is still in a greyzone. People gave the following points.

    1. Greyzone on when and for how long you should be considered PK in a war.
    2. Open OK or not. Some people think its OK some people think its a bad idea.

    Winning / Losing conditions.

    I haven't heard about this so far. I somewhat gather that people want it? Yet I hear people thinking it should be a good conflict that can as well go for several days to really play out strategy and everything else. 

    Conclusion:

    Nobody who are active in this current war or even the last does think it works smoothly and is fun on each side. I couldn't care less about this and that and IC / OOC reasons to why you think so, but the fact remains that the system is not something the majority likes. We do have some different approaches on where we can go though.
  • LartusLartus Member Posts: 451 ✭✭✭
    What about making shrines easy to rebuild and destroy? Instead of the current commodities, use corpses from bashing to Build/defile shrines. I find the defiling and sanctifying windows to be kind of weird, but this is Imperian's system so I guess that's just the way things are. Though, as someone who did participate in a shrine war back then, I remember how fun it can be. The current system is tedious. 
  • KalynthariKalynthari Member Posts: 278 ✭✭✭

    Galt said:

    You missed the /s tag somewhere in your post.
  • MereisMereis Member Posts: 229 ✭✭✭
    The Demon's Pass Flame shrines are the main focus of the war right now because they're the sole remaining Flame shrines that can be defiled. It's not just because " hur hur hur we pretend this RP reason because we want that bashing spot". If Flame bothered to care, they should have noticed that the Leechwood, for its part, first took down shrines in Khous, Yhumara, and some in the Necropolis. This is not just about DP.

    The only other accessible shrines that Flame has, last I checked, were immune ones in Nagmara and the Necropolis. Immune because of geography and shrine mechanics, which cannot realistically be removed anyway.

    As for win/lose conditions: this is a great opportunity for Flame, because it is technically facing three different sects, two of which are relatively small. They can send in peace proposals to each sect of the coalition separately. Could probably lessen the enemies.

    PS I am amoozed that there are graffiti implying that Leechwood is the grand saviour of the coalition/Hunger. It is by far the smallest of the three sects, in terms of number of participants :D
    currently tentatively active
    (may vanish for periods of time)
    Jalaras
Sign In or Register to comment.