Best Of

The major problem with anything that's coming from the player side is that perspectives are skewed. I hear a lot of comments about how SL should be able to compete with a certain number, etc, when our reality is that we wipe when fighting certain people all the time.

So if you're relying on an honour system, it's still not exactly going to be fair because pure numbers don't count when 80% of the peope on one side do not have the artifacts, experience, or coding that the other do. Again, because I feel like I need to keep saying this, this is NOT saying IHC needs to feel responsible, guilty, etc for this. It's just a statement of fact. Something being worked on slowly, but it does mean there is a delay between intent and result on that front. 

Kali said:

If you define victory as denying things to others, and a loss as them getting things, regardless of your own personal gain, then quite frankly you deserve the "loss". I really think you should take a step back and reevaluate why you play the game.

This is why I stopped playing. Talking about how denying the enemy a win *is* the point of competition is a really telling mask off moment. It reveals that the drive to punish other players is behind [at least some of] rhetoric about the value of competition here. 

Both sides got what they wanted. Admin didn't make SL lose or IHC win. They made it a draw due to something that both sides have agreed was an issue. I don't understand the resentment of that. SL wasn't stripped of anything by the admin.

I agree a lot with what Vexacion had to say  about overall current balance. I think that the easiest fix would be for all Orgs to forgo all alliances. This means that Orgs would need to stand on their own. I would say that in this scenario Magnagora, Celest, and Serenwilde would fair the best, but the others could definitely spark up much easier than current SL needs to in order to fight current IHC.

An idea is to make TQs have 3 different TQs at once. Each pitting one Org against another Org. Depending on which Org I am depends on which TQ entrance I have. This could be random pitting allies or enemies.

Obviously, some Orgs would struggle more than others, but that just sheds light on the fact we don't have enough combatants to support 6 Orgs. 

 

If you define victory as denying things to others, and a loss as them getting things, regardless of your own personal gain, then quite frankly you deserve the "loss". I really think you should take a step back and reevaluate why you play the game.

Ayisdra said:

Drastrath said:

Both sides got what they wanted. Admin didn't make SL lose or IHC win. They made it a draw due to something that both sides have agreed was an issue. I don't understand the resentment of that. SL wasn't stripped of anything by the admin.
 

Please stop saying this. SL did not get what they wanted. SL did not win.  IHC went from losing (again, in the game's biggest contest) to winning. If you want to be super picky, 'both sides' did not agree to it. The admin asked ONLY parhelion and ixion. Those two people do not represent their whole alliance.

Stop defining getting an ascendant as 'winning'. It is much more complex than that. At best, SL tied.

See my post for things - Large parts of SL defined winning as there being ONE winner.  Some define it as stopping Mag (Celest's whole idea is to stop the taint). To those (which is probably going to be a larger part), SL lost once it was declared a tie/Ixion was going to be raised

Was your goal to raise a TA or prevent a TA? If raising a TA was your goal then you achieved your goal (The definition of winning I am using.). If your goal was to prevent a TA then you weren't playing Ascension the way it is intended as the goal of Ascension is to raise a TA. In my opinion, if prevention of Ascension was your goal then that is a very toxic goal. 

Edit: Grammar

Sapphira said:

Rehashing ascension and the decision made is beyond flogging a dead horse. We've heard it all by now several times. Can we avoid the dreaded A word for now?

And telling our side to 'get over it' by saying this means the game is just going to stay the same.
The decision has wrecked our side's trust in Orael/admin. It has killed a lot of people's motivation to sign in, while raising your sides motiviation, and has led to the current numbers imbalance.

1.  There's tons of little things I enjoy. Excluding events, the fact that you can get blown off the clockwork tower in Magnagora is hilarious.
2.  This is the topic of a writing contest I started actually! Excluding the Twelve who are obviously just misunderstood heroes, spoiler for my own entry, its Ghani.  One of my favorite roleplay aspects in Lusternia is all the subtle interplay between Magnagora's noble families,  and one of them taking center stage and vying to become a soulless avatar? Perfect! The ascension event with him was my absolute favorite, though I'm sad I missed the actual ascension trial with him murdering people.
3.  Big event was, as I mentioned the Ghani ascension build-up I loved. Everything with his henchmen spying on the cities and then Magnagora arresting them was great.
4.  Depends on if you are asking this ICly or OOCly.
5.  Not sure.


Uzriel with ultimate god-power? There's a couple of ways he might go, so I'll just say one possibility (but not the only one) is calling himself the God of Industry (but really is more the god of Pollution). His aesthetic would be iron, steel, and soot with the goal of generally turning the Basin into an industrial wasteland. Draining the Inner Sea, turning the forests into a giant furnace with some set aside as preserves (literally fossilized trees).

Sapphira said:

I didn't say get over it, but it feels like a great way to get a thread locked rather than a productive argument to find a solution. 

I have a genuine question - what would help the shadow light side of things feel incentive to stick out and keep trying rather than escape a timequake without engaging, for example. Not talking numbers, let's say it's even or in your favour, what is it that would help you -want- to stay and fight or keep trying? Maybe if we can really pin point what is disheartening and or frustrating, or incentive, we can find solutions. 

I can't speak for other people but I very much know that if I see people in a TQ that I have trouble not dying to, then I am just not going to have fun so there's no point in staying. It's not 'those people are assholes and how dare they kill me omg omg'. It's just 'oh hey, these people have skills I can't counter and with the current people we have we always struggle to make a kill so rather than get angry and frustrated that we failed, I'm happier to dip out and do something else constructive'. 

At this point, we need people who will teach, lead, and some syngergy worked out that's feasible with our current combatants and their skills. Without that, nothing is going to change.  

Chogan said:

I can't strongly recommend putting a lot of effort into rebuilding your alliance PvP capabilities, because it is time intensive, emotionally draining, and after your hard work and investment seems to pay off, the admin has shown a willingness to just roll through and take it all away without any sort of justification.

I do recommend trying to enjoy the RP side of the game, it's where Lusternia shines. It has a rich history and loving admin nurturing their orders and helping people realize their visions within the game. Competitively, there are far better offerings out there.

No, this is nonsense, and this thread is not about RP. Start one about RP if you like.