Your View: Heists

[Temp 2006]

Against.

The suggested system only allows players that were within 100 blocks of the heist's beginning to interact with the instance, which doesn't make much or any sense when it comes down to it. If the group of thieves is spotted by someone who then hops on a horse to notify a group at an alternate location that just so happens to be 101+ blocks out, they can't do anything about it. It doesn't make sense and the chances of abusing midnight(IRL) heists hasn't been addressed by the original idea.

[Jonificus 2741]

Sounds like it'll be too easy for the thieves imo. The victims should get at least some form of vague notification to defend their goods (like a rumor of a heist happening in town sometime this week, idk!)

 

I'm all for this idea, but I'd like to see if it'll be entertaining for both parts! 

[Wrynn 1349]

1 hour ago, Pess said:

~Snip~

 

1 hour ago, Temp said:

~Snip~

 

1 hour ago, Jonificus said:

~Snip~

So, yep~ These are all really good points. Firstly I'll respond to Pess and work from there!

 

So- the heist system is heavily GM involved, and of course it's a good point that this sytem shouldn't become another way to just become OOC abuse. Since the system is heavily GM inolved, we make sure that the attackers have thought through what they're going to do, and they haven't just came up and said "yolo, doing a heist 420, cause i h8 dis person." The communication between GMs and Players is vital. As conducting a heist takes resources on the attackers part too, they will want to succeed so we hope that planning will occur whenever someone will try to co-ordinate a heist.

 

We want heists to offer up roleplay just as much as other areas of lotc can. And, I suppose this does link into Jonificus' point, perhaps there could be clues left as to if a heist was going to take place. For example, that could be the attackers going to the area first and scouting it out to make sure their plan is possible, seeing where entryways are etc. And perhaps there may even be a mole in the group who will rat them out! Who knows?!

 

And lastly, in response to temp. The 100 block rule can be changed of course, this system isn't set in stone as I've said. And if player feedback is recpetive and we start working with this system, we will start to refine the rules more. Also! Onto the midnight point, since the player has to contact a GM to conduct a heist, we will make sure that the defenders have a chance to stop the attackers, so that could be making sure that no heists occur at the peak of midnight when nobody is on.

 

Heists are a system that will be mostly roleplay. The planning is needed to done in roleplay, the heist will occur in roleplay!

[Suika 111]

I'm afraid of what it would do to public libraries. If they were somehow protected I would support this. *Suika casts spell of public library protection*

 

There's already magic protection on bookshelves, I say we leave magic protection on bookshelves alone.

 

[TeaLulu 1783]

Several disagreements;

 

"Only the players who are within 100 blocks of the heist when the heist begins may interfere" - No thanks. What if I find out about it and send a bird for additional help? What if I log on shortly after it begins? You can't enforce restrictions of who can and cannot interfere with RP; That's overly protective to the 'thieves', who should not get more 'protection' for the RP than anyone else gets for any other RP.

 

"Only two charges of TNT may be used to blow through windows, doors, or walls" - Griefing is not allowed at all on the server; That includes during heist. If you have to break blocks to get to it, you can't get to it. Besides, there's a ton of people who metagame where things are hidden and how they are hidden with a variety of different methods.

 

"Set weight/amount able to be stolen" - This is far too vague and needs extreme fine-tuning before even being considered. Just leaving it up to the subjective opinion of the Moderator watching over the Heist will cause people to use GMs who are their friends and who will subjectively let them take whatever they want.

 

Again, I disagree with keeping the heist entirely secret and allowing the people performing it to PM the GM of their choice. This will lead to bias inevitably. It will also mean the people performing the heist will specifically perform it when the people they are stealing from are offline, which does the exact opposite of "creating roleplay".

 

I will admit I'm salty at the very idea of any heist system considering something large was stolen from the Library illegitimately, by somehow using a boat to get to a Library in the middle of a closed lake and then shepherd away something. All I can think of is; "If an LM himself decided to break basic logic and physics with a boat that can just sail over land, what is to keep a GM overseeing a heist from allowing the same?" The precedent has been set.

 

"Heist attackers can not use fast travel to get to their target and can be arrested on the journey. Similar to raid rules it makes it harder for the attackers to be successful." - Yea, except how is it going to be obvious they are going to steal something? They're not going to RP taking all those thieving supplies with them. In addition, this also doesn't clarify how they must escape from the target area; Without clarifying that they cannot Fast Travel or SS away from the heist area, then as soon as they are done heisting they will just SS away.

 

This system also doesn't give a clarification or difference from mechanical items VS "RP" things such as large RP items or things like ships and boats. It also doesn't clarify whether or not someone can lockpick a chest and override the current rule of "only taking named items", and how much they can take.

 

I don't see how this system adds anything to roleplay, as it currently is. All it does is give a way for people to steal large quantities of things from others with no limitations, and happily do so when they are offline and no one is around in RP to try and stop them. There seems to be no established limits on the "heists" and how frequently they can occur or how often one party can be a victim of them. That means you GMs will be getting these requests...freaking constantly. Get ready to waste more staff time supervising these "heists" which will become consistent and heavily frequent as greedy players seek to steal from everyone and anyone they can.

 

Also I don't really want to have to go put back up every single one of the books in the Library because every nation decides to steal the entire inventory on a weekly basis.

[AlmondTree 418]

38 minutes ago, Wrynntastic. said:

 

 

So, yep~ These are all really good points. Firstly I'll respond to Pess and work from there!

 

So- the heist system is heavily GM involved, and of course it's a good point that this sytem shouldn't become another way to just become OOC abuse. Since the system is heavily GM inolved, we make sure that the attackers have thought through what they're going to do, and they haven't just came up and said "yolo, doing a heist 420, cause i h8 dis person." The communication between GMs and Players is vital. 

I meant what Tehlulu also mentioned, heists looks like a one way communication as in the victim will not be online or not there most likely. So it only benefits the heisters while the victim doesn't get..any RP really other than what I mentioned, having to deal with the negatives.

[Eurielle 1189]

I can see the possibility of pixel hunt memez causing some issues but god damn have I wanted to roleplay Payday: Castle edition.

 

**** the nation chest pixels I just want to load up a bunch of people with clown masks and mic spam loud music while I pretend to steal things but i'm really just hand cuffing people for no relevant reason other than fun.

 

 

 

[Aesopian 1640]

Eh, sure.

[Wrynn 1349]

3 hours ago, Pess said:

I meant what Tehlulu also mentioned, heists looks like a one way communication as in the victim will not be online or not there most likely. So it only benefits the heisters while the victim doesn't get..any RP really other than what I mentioned, having to deal with the negatives.

Yeah; Again I mentioned this in my last response. Since the GMs are heavily involved, we're going to try and make so the defenders do have a chance, and are able to get rp out of it. We would be able to change things about times etc that the attackers have submitted. This will allow us to give the defenders the best possible chance to keep their stuff, and also perhaps get some rp out of it.

[Hackhen 68]

+1 sonds good

[AlmondTree 418]

21 minutes ago, Wrynntastic. said:

Yeah; Again I mentioned this in my last response. Since the GMs are heavily involved, we're going to try and make so the defenders do have a chance, and are able to get rp out of it. We would be able to change things about times etc that the attackers have submitted. This will allow us to give the defenders the best possible chance to keep their stuff, and also perhaps get some rp out of it.

Hm I feel this will not bring joy to the majority of the audience involved and I simply feel it is too much of a system aimed to benefit the actors not victims. In theory it would be fun but in practice it has too much room for OOC drama to erupt even with what you say, GM moderating.

 

Why not make a staff sponsored instance that players could attempt to heist rather than having it be on the expense of players? That or make players consent to it or be put on a list that accepts heists. I am sure people will argue that it is not RP friendly but I'm convinced that it benefits the heisters not the victim.

 

 

[Kanrath 190]

As someone who had a lockpicking va for a long time and has done thief roleplay I'd like to see 3 changes.

 

1: Require at least one owner/resident of the place targeted to be on. This would make heists targeted at single resident buildings difficult to plan and less common and ones targeted and larger forts and town vaults more common meaning the impact would be less as your taking from a larger over all item pile. 2: Tnt only used in cracking a vault or getting past a fortress outer wall, not in general to enter a room or such as is overkill for non fortified buildings and the opposite of discreet. 3: the 100 blocks rule isn't bad but the fact is people still at times will wander in from outside without any meta or anything and telling them they cannot be involved is failing to abide the basic rules of rp.

 

  I'd say allow people who are directly rp related to the building or are guards for a city/town to interfere if they find out whats going on even if they were outside the 100 blocks, like any actual heist being discreet and quick is really important and failure to do such should result in needing an escape route and a plan to deal with the guard force or such.

[Cat Evocation 3728]

Seems like anyone who disagrees just doesn't want to see their pixels poof. I see it as a better alternative than 40 flays running around abusing defender default making it so you have to pvp and just walking off with inventory's full of stuff type raids.

[El Ricktador 1394]

I like this idea. I think this idea could also be supplemented by requiring nations to have a bank building if they have an auction house and/or a bank NPC. This bank building could require a certain amount of some sort of resource in order to remain functional. If the thieves steal enough of this resource, the bank/auction NPC is lost. Something like that.

[AlmondTree 418]

16 minutes ago, Tox said:

Seems like anyone who disagrees just doesn't want to see their pixels poof. I see it as a better alternative than 40 flays running around abusing defender default making it so you have to pvp and just walking off with inventory's full of stuff type raids.

Not at all about pixel poof. It's about player interaction, when you have a possible villain situation were only one part are able to have enjoyable RP then there's a problem. I doubt many find it fun to discover possessions gone with the inability to follow up on it. If this were a thing where both villain and victim could receive interesting RP then go for it. Staff moderation will not change the fact that the victim will have very little to do.