Your View: Raids

[Nathan_Barnett36 1564]

18 hours ago, drfate786 said:

 

In the Fringe, people knew when a raid was coming. Either they told each other in PM's or someone leaked their teamspeak info. This is literally no different. You had 40 vs 40's every single day and there never was an issue with this.

This isn't the fringe and the point of a raid is a surprised attack

[Cya 440]

On 9/1/2018 at 7:52 AM, Hero_Prodigal said:

1. Remove ‘raid ladders’ feature if this is still around. People should be able to use regular ladders to get into places during raids. 

2. Reduce raid CD from 5 days to 2 days.

3. What harrison said about less toxicity which should be enforced, I agree.

4. Increase raider amount cap to 12 for spontaneous or 25 for 24 hr notice. An oocly enforced cap to a force u can bring doesn’t make sense at all. Also guards can ringey ringey their bell and get their buddies to come! (People only raid when a settlement is at peak activity for the day anyways)

5. Battering rams 

^

plus if you want to get real, i don’t think it’s a two sided thing when it comes to raiding problems, tbh I wish that raids could be different but I think they are actually in a good place numbers wise and the 24 hour notice is a good way of adding more numbers for a larger fight. I feel like the rp side of raiders/people who get raided, have an issue with raids because in axios raids were almost always forced to be rp combat with the 4 man cap and relativly high pvp default cap which should never come back.   I think a way to make raids more enjoyable for both parties and to remove less stress and toxicity should be to lower the requirment of pvp default. Since when raiding a majority of arguments arise from 3 things, defender default, the fact one party is trying to avoid pvp, or powergame/metagame. All of these are kind of thrown out the window if you make pvp default cap something like 6+ or 8+ since if you have 9 people in combat and they choose to rp it’s horrible. It’s all *swings sword* *dodges* “Hey you better roll for that.” “I don’t ROLLplay I roleplay nerd.”

[KentuckyFriedCreeper 79]

allow raiders to break into locked chests.

[Ixli 1472]

On 8/31/2018 at 9:05 PM, Harrison said:

dont be mean ooc to the people you raid

dont be mean ooc to the people who raid you

gms should punish the people who break this

 

On 8/31/2018 at 9:06 PM, Aeldrin said:

literally just keep raids as they are

 

+1

On 9/4/2018 at 3:54 PM, Harold said:

i like the raid rules

 

Me too

[Narthok 10416]

On 9/4/2018 at 4:09 PM, KentuckyFriedCreeper said:

allow raiders to break into locked chests.

this would be an interesting amendment 

[Wulfery 832]

8 hours ago, Narthok said:

this would be an interesting amendment 

No.

[Christ 939]

On ‎8‎/‎31‎/‎2018 at 6:28 PM, Narthok said:

The intent is to gather data to make raids more fun and more meaningful both for the mechanically oriented and the hardcore rp oriented populations of the server. Ideally I'd really like to see two kinds of raids. A more severe with a large cd that essentially replaced the pillage warclaim. And a smaller raid that would be very similar to how they are now but with a larger cap and a warning to the defenders in advance.

I am quite late and since I'm banned my opinion serves no purpose for another month but you see what happens when raiders show up, instantly all gates are closed, no rp or anything. But If you have it to where you give them anything more than a 10 second heads up they will close all gates, the term raid is an overdefined term, if you pvp on another persons land then it's a raid. So giving them a heads up saying "Hey, I plan on attacking this person in the next two hours. Then they just close the gates. The reason raids aren't meaningful is because the defending party doesn't commonly like pvp. If you are raiding them they instantly go into salt mode and many of them try to put up a fight saying "you can't raid me." As if it's a choice. But basically what i'm trying to say is raids are a good thing for attackers but defenders always have a piss party over it. I prefer if we don't give defenders a warning. Or else there won't be a raid, it will be people running around the walls trying to find a way in. Have you ever tried raiding holm? The dominion? Most of there defense is them placing walls in places that's illogical and the dominion just has walls sky high so there isn't much you can do.

[Narthok 10416]

22 minutes ago, Chromie said:

I am quite late and since I'm banned my opinion serves no purpose for another month but you see what happens when raiders show up, instantly all gates are closed, no rp or anything. But If you have it to where you give them anything more than a 10 second heads up they will close all gates, the term raid is an overdefined term, if you pvp on another persons land then it's a raid. So giving them a heads up saying "Hey, I plan on attacking this person in the next two hours. Then they just close the gates. The reason raids aren't meaningful is because the defending party doesn't commonly like pvp. If you are raiding them they instantly go into salt mode and many of them try to put up a fight saying "you can't raid me." As if it's a choice. But basically what i'm trying to say is raids are a good thing for attackers but defenders always have a piss party over it. I prefer if we don't give defenders a warning. Or else there won't be a raid, it will be people running around the walls trying to find a way in. Have you ever tried raiding holm? The dominion? Most of there defense is them placing walls in places that's illogical and the dominion just has walls sky high so there isn't much you can do.

I have suggested adding battering rams to solve that issue

[zaezae 1098]

Get told to build walls to prevent raids. Build walls. "These walls are a real problem."

[Narthok 10416]

1 hour ago, zaezae said:

Get told to build walls to prevent raids. Build walls. "These walls are a real problem."

truly 10d settlers of Catan

[Flugal 27]

As I stated in another thread I believe that a sort of condition that the defending party can meet can end the raid.

this gives raids potential political purpose.  

[Narthok 10416]

7 hours ago, Flugal said:

As I stated in another thread I believe that a sort of condition that the defending party can meet can end the raid.

this gives raids potential political purpose.  

can you give an example?

[Flugal 27]

7 hours ago, Narthok said:

can you give an example?

Before you start the raid you say, for example, “5000 minas or we raid!” If the condition isn’t met the raid can proceed.

[Christ 939]

On ‎9‎/‎12‎/‎2018 at 2:39 PM, Narthok said:

I have suggested adding battering rams to solve that issue

I like the idea, care to share how you want the battering rams to work? because until then, I suggest don't implement a warning system without a battering ram already in place. 

[Narthok 10416]

2 minutes ago, Chromie said:

I like the idea, care to share how you want the battering rams to work? because until then, I suggest don't implement a warning system without a battering ram already in place. 

The proposed rewrite is being given out soonTM for the community to review. The full mechanics of the ram system will be outlined within. But in short its a system designed to promote interaction between player groups and punish the 40 foot high unraidable settlements for cutting themselves off from everyone else.