[Community Review] Raids

[Narthok 10416]

1 minute ago, ZhulikAltWithBadRepRatio said:

1.4 Any individual that is downed during the duration of a raid (within the confines of the raided settlement and its immediacy) may be captured even if they are popped or D40. To do so make a modreq while providing a screencap of the individual being downed, ideally accompanied by a timestamp.

1. Captives may roll to break their bonds. A captive is permitted 3 tries but must do so with the supervision of a Moderator. Bonds of any kind will be broken on a roll of 15+.

2. If someone is executed or bleeds out during the raid they may not be captured / tped back.

First ez abuse is just emoting you bleed out to avoid capture. Additionally on this point, if you've ever dealt with uncooperative prisoners, the bind breaking stuff is actually abusable to the highest degree. It took me and my guys 2 hours once to get Manatee to a prison cell and then they just shut off. Now couple that with ROLLS to escape - yeah no.

Next, I think the prevention of non-loyalty declared chars is also sort of dumb. If you've a merc char who has no alleigance and tags along for the promise of loot, that should be alleigance enough.

I also spit on the taking of heads because you can't do it normally. If I was able to kill a peasant on the road right now solo, I could not take their head without permission. The same should apply for a raid. Alternatively, modify the head rule so that only ATTACKERS can have their heads taken by Defenders. Or, make it so that you can only acquire a head through RP and make the option that if you execute someone, you either give them your MC head or gear.

 

Ah I meant mechanically bleed out via the down timer. If you d40 at all you're getting swiftly tped back, but I'll clarify that now. As for uncooperative prisoners, I'd be more than happy to just tp someone who is being a ***** into a prison and should they continue to have a fit they'll be taking a break from lotc. I'd also say these rolls are limited and are iron door tier thresholds. 

 

Yep I'd be fine with that as a declaration of intent so long as it has actually been rped and isn't a 1 day alt with no rp at all on the persona 

 

@Zhulik we were actually going to modify the head rule to be in line with this proposal if it ended up passing. 

[Kvasir 1121]

fight fight fight

[Islamadon 9158]

2 minutes ago, Narthok said:

Ah I meant mechanically bleed out via the down timer. If you d40 at all you're getting swiftly tped back, but I'll clarify that now. As for uncooperative prisoners, I'd be more than happy to just tp someone who is being a ***** into a prison and should they continue to have a fit they'll be taking a break from lotc. I'd also say these rolls are limited and are iron door tier thresholds. 

 

Yep I'd be fine with that as a declaration of intent so long as it has actually been rped and isn't a 1 day alt with no rp at all on the persona 

 

@Zhulik we were actually going to modify the head rule to be in line with this proposal if it ended up passing. 

I mean you can't really force the players to rp a certain way can you? If a person wants to rp bleeding out or dying are you still going to force their capture? seems like gm overreach.

Edit: I also don't like breaking free of binds to be an random roll either. Seems unrealistic If I were captured immediately and rolled a 20/20, I could then try running. Then, force pvp default and escape through MC mechanics.

[Jasonhz 58]

1.1 No Please. Unless a battering ram is used, or it's a 10+ raid, why?

1.2 Sure. Make smaller freebuilds, such as an Orc Camp be able to declare a raid as well. If the raiders have to waste 10 minutes to walk, and that removes 10 minutes off the 1 hour though, no please.

1.4 - 2 Please give a system for 'bleeding out'

 

2.1 Please make it 50 blocks of the city intended to be raided, Free build or Nations. Since, some uh, nations, have huge tiles.

2.3 No please. 20000 - 10000 minas is probably what people pay for warclaims. Maybe even less, I'm not sure. Instead of making them pay huge amounts, make it so that one raiding party(Using the allegiance system) can only use one battering ram per two weeks or per month.

2.4 Fix the fact that people replace parts of the walls from full blocks to stairs.

 

4.1 Keep a cap, or it'll turn into a warclaim server real quick.

4.2  At least 3 days or people will complain.

4.3 Too long, people will also complain. Following my above point, keep the CD to 5 days.

4.4 Where's 4.4

4.5 Again, to long, etc etc.

 

5.1 add 'within 50 blocks of the intended target for the raid'

5.2 Please add a system of 'fleeing' or 'hiding', or people will just hide and get out and then repeat.

5.3 If the city has less than 3 people in, then there should be no consequences, because it wont be considered raid baiting, because it can't be a raid, and other stuff.

 

 

 

[Narthok 10416]

4 minutes ago, ZhulikAltWithBadRepRatio said:

I mean you can't really force the players to rp a certain way can you? If a person wants to rp bleeding out or dying are you still going to force their capture? seems like gm overreach.

Edit: I also don't like breaking free of binds to be an random roll either. Seems unrealistic If I were captured immediately and rolled a 20/20, I could then try running. Then, force pvp default and escape through MC mechanics.

I do think that the ability for captured players to have that ability to escape adds a bit of dynamism, but that is a fair criticism. So you think that freedom rolls should be removed entirely from the submission?

[WuHanXianShi14 0]

6 hours ago, Aeldrin said:

Please just keep raids as they are. They're currently fine. These rules call for over-regulation from the GM Team and nobody wants that. One hour announcements, unlimited caps, and use of battering rams just make them miniature warclaims.

I would like to point out that when I agree with ww2buff about something as fundamental as this (albeit probably for different reasons) its probably a good sign that this whole thing is genuinely a bad idea

[H7R5 55]

leo sweating bruh

[Narthok 10416]

Just now, WuHanXianShi14 said:

I would like to point out that when I agree with ww2buff about something as fundamental as this (albeit probably for different reasons) its probably a good sign that this whole thing is genuinely a bad idea

The status quo of raids is unacceptable and the removal of ooc barriers and enabling dynamism is desirable.  If we are all going to whinge endlessly about how lotc used to be good and how it is in decline we should at the very least attempt to resolve the issues that are clearly identifiable.

[WuHanXianShi14 0]

2 minutes ago, Narthok said:

The status quo of raids is unacceptable and the removal of ooc barriers and enabling dynamism is desirable.

You got empirical proof of that or is that just your opinion, one youre using your status to try and force through onto the whole server?

 

Wolfkite's rules post is a lot closer to the current rules, and seems to have a lot more unanimous support and far less opposition than your proposed thread.

[Islamadon 9158]

5 minutes ago, Narthok said:

I do think that the ability for captured players to have that ability to escape adds a bit of dynamism, but that is a fair criticism. So you think that freedom rolls should be removed entirely from the submission?

If you aren't critically wounded IRP, meaning you can't just emote dying, you should not be able to break free when multiple people have binded and captured you. You either get rescue raided or get free'd by that "you can ss after however long" rule

[Narthok 10416]

Just now, WuHanXianShi14 said:

You got empirical proof of that or is that just your opinion, one youre using your status to try and force through onto the whole server?

 

Wolfkite's rules post is a lot closer to the current rules, and seems to have a lot more unanimous support and far less opposition than your proposed thread.

Yeah its real easy to change nothing and achieve nothing I suppose. As for empirical proof we gathered 96 responses regarding their thoughts on raids and feedback indicated that there was large dissatisfaction with the state of raiding. 

Just now, ZhulikAltWithBadRepRatio said:

If you aren't critically wounded IRP, meaning you can't just emote dying, you should not be able to break free when multiple people have binded and captured you. You either get rescue raided or get free'd by that "you can ss after however long" rule

Alright that seems fair enough I'll remove the freedom roll rules.

[WuHanXianShi14 0]

Just now, Narthok said:

Yeah its real easy to change nothing and achieve nothing I suppose. As for empirical proof we gathered 96 responses regarding their thoughts on raids and feedback indicated that there was large dissatisfaction with the state of raiding. 

 

You actually have numerical, statistical or quantitative proof of that or did you just cherry pick individual responses on an open thread through your bias eyes? Because I seem to recall a ton of comments on that thread telling you to keep the raid rules as they are.

[zaezae 1098]

Maybe I'm not understanding something correctly.

 

How exactly do you intend to attack someone with a sword and not gravely wound them in pitch battle?

[H7R5 55]

2 minutes ago, zaezae said:

Maybe I'm not understanding something correctly.

 

How exactly do you intend to attack someone with a sword and not gravely wound them in pitch battle?

Plate armor is ridiculous protection, you don't kill someone in plate with sword, you beat them until they're exhausted from the heavy plates and then you open their visor and stab them in the face if you wanna kill them.

[Narthok 10416]

Also I'm conflicted on death traps and traps in general