[Community Review] Current Raid Rules Draft

[Wrynn 1349]

Just now, ChaseusBelli said:

Didn't you lot do that the last three or so times

Although, yes feedback has been taken, it wasn't of the final draft of the rules and none of the feedback polls actually asked if players would like it on the server and instead rather asked for feedback on particular parts of the rules.

1 minute ago, Its_Just_Leap said:

Look at the vote and it paints a very clear picture that even Stevie Wonder would be able to see. People clearly do not like these rules and the replies are going into specifics. I guess its time for you all to go back to the drawing board.

Yep! I think the feedback thread is going well so far ? It's giving us indication about how we should handle this set of raid rules from here on out.

[Narthok 10416]

2 hours ago, Stack Loot said:

Again, numbers and cooldown are garbage, imagine if the entire Empire of Man decided to raid a freebuild, that’s over 100 people for a raid. With these changes, **** like that is possible. Broadcast is stupid too, do 20 min at most. Plus all the broadcast is going to do is tell the people being raided to just ss out or log off. 

Cap is 30 as of the last polling, broadcast is to make raiding content engaging for both raiders and defenders rather than a cheese stomp. 

2 hours ago, Aeldrin said:

Not sure how many times we have to keep repeating the same objections that u just keep ignoring but it's getting pretty annoying

 

1.1 Personally I'm opposed to any broadcast, but if we're really going to do it, it should be 20 minutes ahead of time at the absolute max.

1.2 Restricting where raids can be launched from is dumb and contrary to roleplay.

1.3 This is very subjective, and I guarantee it'll be over-enforced in some scenarios, and not enforced at all in others.

1.4 Sounds like a good way for nations to get around cb rules by raiding and executing every NL they can get their hands on.

1.5 You're going to have so many repeats of the same individuals' heads/bodies, and it's going to make no sense. Never has been a good explanation for what happens when someone sees their own body/head, which is why any taken bodies/heads should be vague generals instead of individuals (ie. a dead orc, instead of the dead body of khorgak the orc).

2.3 Battering rams are a **** idea that discourage defenses. The argument used to be that if a settlement wanted to protect its roleplay from raids, it actually could through valid means. You've now removed that and made every settlement penetrable. Keep that **** to warclaims and stop trying to make raids something they're not.

2.5 All of these trap limitations are aggressively dumb. You're discouraging innovative defenses. As long as a trap doesn't have a chance to randomly ensnare/kill randos (ie. has to be activatable) and is realistic (can be explained in-rp), it should be allowed.

4.1 Uncapped raids are cancer and unrealistic. Once again, mini-warclaims. Stop trying to make raids something they're not. Nobody wants to get swarmed by 50-100 raiders that's literally just a warclaim lmao

4.2 A 2 day cooldown for uncapped raids (victory or not) is absolute aids seriously who wrote this

5.3 Unlimited 4-man raids is absolute cancer and whoever thought of this is delusional. Should be 2-man at absolute most. This is going to be massively abused.

5.5.1 **** subjective rule, scrap it

 

These rules are absolutely terrible. There was literally nothing wrong with the old rules, and they were generally well-liked.

1.1 going with 30

1.2 raiding metropolises with your 5 man bandit band is against roleplay as well

1.3 ok

1.4 sounds like dynamic rp,

1.5 people should pk or properly rp avoiding scenarios that result in death. 

2.3 we can agree to disagree

2.5 ok

4.1 30 cap idk why it isn't included must have forgotten. Uncapped is still desirable tho. 

4.2 I did brother

5.3 will review

5.5.1 no

 

1 hour ago, Unwillingly said:

Raids are a sudden attack on an enemy base. It defeats the entire point if the defenders get an hour warning in advance. Its stupid. Ill give a full response later but im on mobile atm.

30 minute warning ?raids should be fun for both sides.

1 hour ago, Skraag said:

There's a lot here I'm happy to see, and some things I'm not so glad to see. My own opinions aside, I do think this bit seems a little confusing.

"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. 

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

Seems like it's saying "If you kill someone, and prove it, you can capture them." only to go on to say "If you kill someone, you can't capture them."

Idk if I wrote this poorly but let me explain the intent. TLDR if you get downed and 'pop' or are 'executed' naturally during a raid then you cannot be captured. If you /d40 to avoid capture you can be tped back. If you are picked up then you are captured irp. I'll reword as its pretty bad atm. 

1 hour ago, Unwillingly said:

Not to mention, it should be the raiders jobs to keep this person alive anyways, as it has always been. Really not a fan of this section.

refer to the above

1 hour ago, Suxals said:

1.4 Nope, they should keep them alive if they want to capture them, if they pop then they died in rp.

 

1.5 I don't like it, i don't see a reason to change it from what it was before, plus people would be using private skins for nps without the approval of the creator of such skin. Also some characters don't leave a body when they die, like mine that turns into ashes.

 

4.2 Make the cooldown 7 days if the defenders lose, 2 days is too little if the raid is uncapped.

refer to the above

[Enlightenment 2295]

16 minutes ago, Its_Just_Leap said:

And then there's you. I agree that PvP is needed for some aspects of the server such as warclaims, but stop being over dramatic. Oh and honey please don't act like you have the power to take down the server with your "Last an final warning" ,cool off your ego for a moment. I highly doubt (infact I could guarantee)  the server will not drop dead because PvP goons leave.

 

It would be in the server's and communities' best interest to not regulate raids with such restrictions, lest it wishes to alienate the PvP community and degenerate permanently from such a loss. It's honestly disgusting the length certain parts of the server's community will go to restrict raid's though OOC means rather then RP means.

[Narthok 10416]

1 hour ago, Skraag said:

Another point, while admittedly, I don't understand fully how battering rams work (As I haven't seen one in game at this point) I sincerely hope there's a cooldown on the sign people are expected to be hitting to operate it.
I'm not necessarily against the idea of a battering ram, if people are willing to invest that much in something that can break more power to them. I'll even go so far as to say it might give the defenders better chance to defend ironically due in part to the potential need of raiders to focus more on fighting off people attempting to break the ram than breaking IN..however this leads me to my next point.
As I've said, I am NOT aware of if there is any form of noticeable cooldown for the sign, but if it's going to end up being a handful of raiders rapidly clicking over and over to smash a gate I fail to see how the defenders are supposed to have reasonable chance to disable it. Breaking five iron blocks definitely isn't the slowest thing in the world, but when the siege machine starts right at the gate, and you have worry about what (assuming no one has gotten in yet, because at that point I figure destroying the machine would be a secondary concern) is the entire raiding party waiting to pop you the moment you take out a pickaxe.

Now, I've said a lot already, but far be it from me to complain about anything without first acknowledging some positive points about the thing I'm protesting. I'm more than capable of looking in on myself from another point of view and seeing how my words could and more than likely WILL be disregarded as "Boo hoo, Ram not easy to stop!" and I believe that as expensive as it is, and easily in theory as it is to render useless, you may as well get your money's worth. All in all, half of my above mentioned concerns are entirely moot if some such cooldown exists anyhow.

would work like trebs with an automatic cd. 

 

 

[Luciloo 2680]

29 minutes ago, Illuminare said:

If you further alienate the PvP community, you will kill the server. This is your last and final warning.

 

Good

[Enlightenment 2295]

2 minutes ago, Aethling said:

 

Good

 

I mean, do you really want to see the server die? Kinda makes me sad that folks like yourself want to destroy this server after so many years of being on it, kinda.

[Its_Just_Leap 399]

1 minute ago, Illuminare said:

 

It would be in the server's and communities' best interest to not regulate raids with such restrictions, lest it wishes to alienate the PvP community and degenerate permanently from such a loss. It's honestly disgusting the length certain parts of the server's community will go to restrict raid's though OOC means rather then RP means.

I agree that rules on PvP conflict are getting more and more strict for really bad reasons, and I even pointed this out in my reply to the rules. I'm not denying that it seems like the grip on pvp is growing tighter. I'm simply saying that if all of the pure pvp goons left the server then it wouldn't be the death of the server like you were perpetuating. I want to point out to you that this has NOTHING to do with RP means, and its not here to spite pvp goons like I'm sure you would love to believe. Its updating a fairly **** set of rules and atleast they're putting it out for community review rather than just shoving it down our throats.

[Narthok 10416]

the ******* ruleset that was presented is outdated

 

[Enlightenment 2295]

Just now, Jaeden said:

damn elves whining again

 

Couldn't have said it better myself, your majesty.

[WuHanXianShi14 0]

33 minutes ago, Illuminare said:

 

I mean, do you really want to see the server die? Kinda makes me sad that folks like yourself want to destroy this server after so many years of being on it, kinda.

I do, I'd finally be free 

[Dyl 2088]

41 minutes ago, Narthok said:

Cap is 30 as of the last polling, broadcast is to make raiding content engaging for both raiders and defenders rather than a cheese stomp. 

1.1 going with 30

1.2 raiding metropolises with your 5 man bandit band is against roleplay as well

1.3 ok

1.4 sounds like dynamic rp,

1.5 people should pk or properly rp avoiding scenarios that result in death. 

2.3 we can agree to disagree

2.5 ok

4.1 30 cap idk why it isn't included must have forgotten. Uncapped is still desirable tho. 

4.2 I did brother

5.3 will review

5.5.1 no

 

30 minute warning ?raids should be fun for both sides.

Idk if I wrote this poorly but let me explain the intent. TLDR if you get downed and 'pop' or are 'executed' naturally during a raid then you cannot be captured. If you /d40 to avoid capture you can be tped back. If you are picked up then you are captured irp. I'll reword as its pretty bad atm. 

refer to the above

refer to the above

If you give the orcs and dwarves 30 people, unless they’re raiding the empire, they’re not losing. The raised cap will only make it easier for them to win. As well as the announcement only serves to let people know to log off, I seriously doubt groups will rally. 

[WuHanXianShi14 0]

@Narthokit's stunning how you selectively implement changes to your rules to give us the illusion of "listening to feedback" while ultimately refusing to budge on the core pieces of your agenda no matter how many people speak out against it

[Christ 939]

9 minutes ago, WuHanXianShi14 said:

@Narthokit's stunning how you selectively implement changes to your rules to give us the illusion of "listening to feedback" while ultimately refusing to budge on the core pieces of your agenda no matter how many people speak out against it

HONESTLY! 

[Man of Respect 5471]

just imagine IRL the vikings go to raid some filthy english weakos and they go to the nearby church filled with gold and be like "sup homies we come from scandinavia and we will be here in a hour to kill all of you!"

3 hours ago, Wrynn said:

4.3 If the defenders are victorious the settlement’s raid cooldown shall be Fourteen Days from the day of the raid.

 

4.5 If the defenders are victorious in both repulsing the first raid and in the retaliatory raid then the settlement’s raid cooldown shall be Twenty One Days.

 

this is also absolutely stupid

[Jasonhz 58]

Hey, Hey,

55 Disagrees

12 Agrees

Hm.. What could be wrong????

 

 

Keep the rules as they are, and if someone thinks something is wrong, they can make a post about it and the GMs can answer that by either changing parts of the rules, or not. Don't change it all at once with opinions from only like 2 GMs.