[Community Review] Raids

[Gladuos 869]

Is it completely impossible to raid a settlement with RP instead of PVP though? What if a group of 4 people want to go attack a settlement, and 4 defenders agree they want to do RP? Is it bannable to do a combat RP in that (admittedly rare) scenario? What's the difference between 4 dudes attacking a settlement through the means of "villainy RP" and a raid? I suggest to at least add a clause that, if everyone in the situation agrees, they can go by their own raid rules.

 

EDIT: I see the rule about it being considered a raid if there are more than 4 villains. So 5 villains vs. 4 defenders would be considered an illegal raid although it doesn't exceed the RP limit?

 

So basically raids are if there are 5+ people attacking a settlement?

[Narthok 10416]

18 minutes ago, WuHanXianShi14 said:

And you're once again making vague references to undisclosed "Stats" as if it legitimizes anything you say. If you want people to take it seriously then show us your data collection, and your collection methods.

 

Most people on this server are chronic complainers. They complained about these rules when prompted, and they'll complain and ***** about yours on the off chance they're actually implemented. The main problem with this server is there is no consistency, we feel the need to overhaul and change **** every 2 months because someone and their friends gets loud enough, and some new up-and-coming tryhard GM decides that catering to whoever is shouting at the time is the best way to make himself look "Active", or "taking initiative". And any work he does is undone within the next few months because the cycle repeats.

 

The rules are they are now are functionally fine, and the raid cap isnt what breeds toxicity, its the people themselves. Because if people are doing shitty RP, acting shittily OOCly, then you dont baby them by saying 'its just because of the rules'. No rule forces you to act like a spastic. Everyone is expected to remain civil, or if not civil, at the very least not actively breaking rules or insulting individuals. Hold players accountable for player behaviour, not the rules. Otherwise that's a pretty terrible attitude for a GM to have.

 

 

Honestly, a fair critique. Let me properly compile the data and publicize it. I'll need an hour or so.

 

@WuHanXianShi14 Yep I've found that many people will complain about things while providing no solutions. That has always been a massive irritant of mine. The cycle of lotc is something that will always happen. We saw the anti nexus band wagon now we're getting to the pro nexus band wagon of the lotc cycle. However I don't think this cycle is necessarily a bad thing as it keeps the server fresh and allows people to reflect on things and change systems in light of old flaws. As for looking active or taking initiative, I don't really care either way. I just want to do work that I feel is important before becoming jaded or just sit on the blue tag complaining about the state of the server and its decline without trying to resolve issues.

 

As to your last point. I'd say its a bit of both. Groups like the reivers and the broskis are undoubtably excessively memey and toxic. They don't roleplay or if they do it is merely to get victims into a position to be killed for pixels. Those members of each group can protest but i've interacted with them enough on a personal level to smell the bullshit under the flowers. I think that removing the cap and forcing groups like these to suffer the consequences of their own unbridled aggression may contribute towards resolving this issue organically. But even in light of that myself and other GMs have been trying to crack down on that kind of behaviour as much as possible so any reports or evidence, even that sent in PMs is incredibly helpful. Not all offences need a ban report filed for us to hand out a ban.

12 minutes ago, Gladuos said:

Is it completely impossible to raid a settlement with RP instead of PVP though? What if a group of 4 people want to go attack a settlement, and 4 defenders agree they want to do RP? Is it bannable to do a combat RP in that (admittedly rare) scenario? What's the difference between 4 dudes attacking a settlement through the means of "villainy RP" and a raid? I suggest to at least add a clause that, if everyone in the situation agrees, they can go by their own raid rules.

While I would love to see rp raids the inherent issue is obviously meta gaming / power gaming and other such factors. The only way I see rp raids being feasible is if combat is locked so that people cannot log on and overwhelm the rp raiders the instant the fight begins. There is nothing less enjoyable than 20 "swings blade" emotes. RP combat should be engaging and nuanced. But if players would like to see some rules to encourage rp raiding I'd be happy to add such things. I just think that in the current state of things rp raids are not feasible without some improvements to the way things currently are. 

 

For example I'd add something along the lines of a combat lock where only those in the rp at the time of the first aggressive emote would be allowed to participate in the crp. This being done to reduce meta and keep the population of the crp manageable. Then once the last person had died the rp would unlock and others would be able to then interact with the raiders. Also I'll add that lat point right now, with the addendum that once you've consented to a certain type of mutually agreed raid procedure you cannot default back to the rules.  

[WuHanXianShi14 0]

6 minutes ago, Narthok said:

 

 

Not so long ago, the orcs of fort stronk captured a druid student of mine. I rallied up a force of elves to go rescue her.

 

When we got there, we learned fort stronk was on cooldown, and rescue raids were only for "High ranking officials", so I had to send my rescue party home, and was OOC blocked from attempting to rescue my student.

 

were we royally fucked by the rules? Yes. Did we choose to be toxic, lash out, or attack anyone OOCly? No.

 

There is absolutely no excuse for being a shitty person OOCly and doing pisspoor RP. No matter what the rules are. Your behaviour is on YOU, and YOU need to be held accountable for it. As a GM, you should not be making excuses for toxic behaviour, period. Even if you were, the raid cap is certainly not the issue here, but the "PVP goon" culture in general.

 

Most people who enjoy PVP dont behave like spastics. Its the culture of OOC circlejerks. People who go on raids make shitty OOC remarks, trolly RP, put minimal effort into their emotes because they know that's what irritates their opponents, pisses them off and degrades them, and at the end of the day, denegrating your enemy while laughing about it in Voice Chat with your buddies is the main goal and that can be done with 10, 20 or 30 people. that is the main culprit of toxicity during your generic bandit-led raids, and not the player cap (which by the way, even common raiders on this thread have been asking you not to abolish).

 

Would love to see how you came to that conclusion, other than just your own opinion, of course.

[neopsychedelia 207]

4 minutes ago, Narthok said:

I think my understanding of pvp culture and community is at a sufficient level to make such a statement. I have been in pvp intensive groups for the majority of my tenure on lotc and have played through many incarnations of such rules. Thus the cap is what I believe is the primary issue. If you disagree then I'd be happy to listen to your thoughts on the matter. As for changing raid culture, that is a matter of us cracking down but we do still need players to report offenders to us otherwise we cannot do anything. 

The pvp community (or the part of that community) at fault for toxicity, trolling and malicious roleplay has had an undeniable history of this behavior within and without actual raids. This happens with your typical bandits all the time, for example. This isn't some growing resentment toward the rules how they are, and even if it was, that kind of behavior would still be in no way appropriate. What you're proposing is not a solution to toxicity; you're offering a dangerous degree of power to a community that already does its' best to skirt the line of acceptability, in an apparent attempt to appease these players who've shown no precedence toward wanting to better themselves or their behaviors. These rules have been built up for a reason and like I've said, this collective behavior needs to change before something like this rewrite can even be considered.

[WuHanXianShi14 0]

If anything, increasing the cap will increase the toxicity, because the bigger the circlejerk, the bigger the fuckery that goes on. This is why warclaims, the PVP fights on LOTC with the highest amount of people, have little to no real RP at all. Even in the rallying stage, everyone is memeing, making digs, screaming, spamming, etc.

[Narthok 10416]

5 minutes ago, WuHanXianShi14 said:

Not so long ago, the orcs of fort stronk captured a druid student of mine. I rallied up a force of elves to go rescue her.

 

When we got there, we learned fort stronk was on cooldown, and rescue raids were only for "High ranking officials", so I had to send my rescue party home, and was OOC blocked from attempting to rescue my student.

 

were we royally fucked by the rules? Yes. Did we choose to be toxic, lash out, or attack anyone OOCly? No.

 

There is absolutely no excuse for being a shitty person OOCly and doing pisspoor RP. No matter what the rules are. Your behaviour is on YOU, and YOU need to be held accountable for it. As a GM, you should not be making excuses for toxic behaviour, period. Even if you were, the raid cap is certainly not the issue here, but the "PVP goon" culture in general.

 

Most people who enjoy PVP dont behave like spastics. Its the culture of OOC circlejerks. People who go on raids make shitty OOC remarks, trolly RP, put minimal effort into their emotes because they know that's what irritates their opponents, pisses them off and degrades them, and at the end of the day, denegrating your enemy while laughing about it in Voice Chat with your buddies is the main goal and that can be done with 10, 20 or 30 people. that is the main culprit of toxicity during your generic bandit-led raids, and not the player cap (which by the way, even common raiders on this thread have been asking you not to abolish).

 

Would love to see how you came to that conclusion, other than just your own opinion, of course.

I'm not making excuses I'm telling you to send me evidence of toxicity or trolly rp and I will literally punish them the minute I see the evidence. OOC barriers are something that ruins good dynamic roleplay. Also that situation has been accounted for in my proposal of the rules, just to self plug a bit. 

1 minute ago, WuHanXianShi14 said:

If anything, increasing the cap will increase the toxicity, because the bigger the circlejerk, the bigger the fuckery that goes on. This is why warclaims, the PVP fights on LOTC with the highest amount of people, have little to no real RP at all. Even in the rallying stage, everyone is memeing, making digs, screaming, spamming, etc.

And that is entirely the fault of us of the GM team for not putting our foot down and making it known that that kind of behaviour is unacceptable on the lotc service. As for an increased cap increasing the toxicity. I don't know if I can agree with this one. At a certain point you'd have to leave your circle jerk and interact with other communities and cliques if you wanted to find success. I also find it extremely partisan how you are fond of looking down on the very people that look down on you. While there may be problematic people int he pvp community who will be punished once I receive some evidence there is also a large swathe of problematic people amongst the CRP community who are just as much as fault as the memers. 

 

Zhuliks earlier point is a perfect example of the toxicity amongst CRPers that can come to the fore. Both sides have problem people but to achieve a better environment we should seek compromise and fix our own behaviour. 

[WuHanXianShi14 0]

5 minutes ago, Narthok said:

I'm not making excuses I'm telling you to send me evidence of toxicity or trolly rp and I will literally punish them the minute I see the evidence.

Sure, easy, let's see if you're good to your word. Most people involved here are repeat offenders too.

https://gyazo.com/7de1a40823bd1d9be882eab08e1804e3

https://gyazo.com/ff46371dfb2bf27ed6ddbcae0ca03c9e

https://gyazo.com/4c71b8f53edef1bc6ec710391259f9e8

 

Doesn't change the fact that player caps on raids have nothing to do with toxicity, and are needed to prevent raids from turning into mini-warclaims.

 

"OOC barriers ruin dynamic roleplay", following that logic you would have no cooldowns, no cap, and no rules. But we both know that would be a shitshow, and therefore your statement isnt true. Instead you are picking and choosing WHICH OOC barriers to implement and which not to, rather arbitrarily.

[Narthok 10416]

2 minutes ago, WuHanXianShi14 said:

Sure, easy, let's see if you're good to your word. Most people involved here are repeat offenders too.

https://gyazo.com/7de1a40823bd1d9be882eab08e1804e3

https://gyazo.com/ff46371dfb2bf27ed6ddbcae0ca03c9e

https://gyazo.com/4c71b8f53edef1bc6ec710391259f9e8

 

Doesn't change the fact that player caps on raids have nothing to do with toxicity, and are needed to prevent raids from turning into mini-warclaims.

Can you add me on disc so I can get a bit more information WrothfulMan#9613

[Eurielle 1189]

@Narthok I do not think that RP combat needs specific raid rules. Any villain that isn't a baby brain should know not to do stupid **** at the gates or in the city square and the general meta gaming and power gaming rules should be valid for stuff happening else where. The only rules I think are needed is are; 1. Emotive combat isn't raiding. 2. Using emotive combat or excessive amounts of people to twist something into mass mechanical PvP is raid baiting.

[Narthok 10416]

1 minute ago, Dunstan said:

@Narthok I do not think that RP combat needs specific raid rules. Any villain that isn't a baby brain should know not to do stupid **** at the gates or in the city square and the general meta gaming and power gaming rules should be valid for stuff happening else where. The only rules I think are needed is are; 1. Emotive combat isn't raiding.2. Using emotive combat to twist something into mass mechanical PvP is raid baiting.

Hm that seems pretty fair actually. If there are no objections I'll add this to the rule set under the 5.0 section 

[Eurielle 1189]

Just now, Narthok said:

Hm that seems pretty fair actually. If there are no objections I'll add this to the rule set under the 5.0 section 

+1

[Narthok 10416]

4 minutes ago, Dunstan said:

+1

How do you see this emotive combat is not raiding rule matching up with the 10 person pvp default clause?

[Eurielle 1189]

2 minutes ago, Narthok said:

How do you see this emotive combat is not raiding rule matching up with the 10 person pvp default clause?

Well if whomever is deemed the attacker is trying to make sure ten people are present, then that would be raid bait.

So if your bringing like ten people or trying to purposely get the town guard to rally then that would be raid baiting but if you get caught doing illegal stuff, your victim just mashes out a /s "GUARDS! HELP!" or a defender sends a bird and it goes over ten then that wouldn't be a raid bait.

[Narthok 10416]

1 minute ago, Dunstan said:

Well if whomever is deemed the attacker is trying to make sure ten people are present, then that would be raid bait.

So if your bringing like ten people or trying to purposely get the town guard to rally then that would be raid baiting but if you get caught doing illegal stuff, your victim just mashes out a /s "GUARDS! HELP!" or a defender sends a bird and it goes over ten then that wouldn't be a raid bait.

alright that seems a fair enough solution

[Narthok 10416]

1 hour ago, WuHanXianShi14 said:

Sure, easy, let's see if you're good to your word. Most people involved here are repeat offenders too.

https://gyazo.com/7de1a40823bd1d9be882eab08e1804e3

https://gyazo.com/ff46371dfb2bf27ed6ddbcae0ca03c9e

https://gyazo.com/4c71b8f53edef1bc6ec710391259f9e8

 

Doesn't change the fact that player caps on raids have nothing to do with toxicity, and are needed to prevent raids from turning into mini-warclaims.

 

"OOC barriers ruin dynamic roleplay", following that logic you would have no cooldowns, no cap, and no rules. But we both know that would be a shitshow, and therefore your statement isnt true. Instead you are picking and choosing WHICH OOC barriers to implement and which not to, rather arbitrarily.