Event PK and RP

NyanaNyana Member Posts: 126 Capable
There are elements of Lusternia that are fundamentally broken when compared to other games. We know combat is imbalanced, pages could be written about it. But if yesterday it had been fixed, it wouldn't solve the problems tonight of 1. People being driven away from participating in an event, and 2. Numbers imbalance, which influences problem 1 and then some. 

So, events are hard, and from what little I know of the one tonight(I logged in a couple times on different alts to check on stuff, but didn't have time to participate in any way) - the people that were able to participate really liked it. And that's great. At the same time, I know several people that felt like they couldn't without getting swarmed by 10-15 people, and so didn't bother. 

PK is not a problem. Conflict is not a problem. Wanting to play a game but feeling it is impossible to do so because of griefing and/or ridiculous mechanics... is a problem. Participating in an event is if both sides showed up, made some reasonable attempt to do X thing, and one of them failed. From what I could tell from checking four different orgs, that didn't happen. 

In part, because this community is so tiny, it means that stacking numbers on one side is an easy way to win any "important" conflict, especially when you have advance notice when it will happen. That wouldn't necessarily be a problem, if there was more of a desire to include people from both sides. Conflict events don't have to be 100% pk from start to finish. But changing this mentality would require motivation from both admin and the playerbase to do so. 

Side issue, the numbers imbalance allowing for attacks on supermobs, where it's 15 people versus... 5. Problems I have with this:

- It made no sense in the context of this event to do that. Yes I know the reason is "because we can, because the mechanics support it"(almost) - but it's not organic conflict, it's just a tedious burden for the people on the absent/currently playing alts on the winning side group. If the community was larger and numbers were more or less the same on both sides at any given time, this would, again, not be a problem.

- It punishes people for showing up to divine events. Hell, it punishes the divine for having them, because the griefed side will stop showing up and/or complain about those same divine. And while I think the event might have gone differently if 15+ people from one side hadn't been waiting for it to start, it still was completely reasonable for it to have BEEN announced in advance. 

I know the attempt on the supermobs failed. The attempt itself still demoralized people who otherwise wanted to play. That's a bad mechanic for conflict, because it doesn't lead to reasonable pk conflict later on, either. No one is going to try to take them down when numbers are even and conflict would actually be interesting... so what is the point of it? Either the supermob battles should require a fair competition between competing players(however we might define that) or eliminate the mechanic altogether.

Griefing people away from events is also a terrible mechanic for conflict, but there's no code fix for it. There needs to be more of a push to interact with(not just pk) players from other orgs. Treating other PLAYERS as enemies to be eliminated will drive them away from the game. That benefits no one.

Offer any suggestions for change in comments.
Tagged:
«134

Comments

  • MinkahmetMinkahmet Member Posts: 104 Capable
  • AlexandriaAlexandria Member Posts: 205 Master
    Minkahmet said:
    This again....
    I know it's hard to believe, but sometimes, people don't always have the same opinions! Perhaps we could see how the discussion goes instead of throwing out snark. :)

    Czixi, the Welkin murmurs, "Fight on, My Effervescent Sylph. I will be with you as you do."

  • SynlSynl Member Posts: 180 Adept
    No clue about event shenanigans. But removing supermob stuff seems fine. I mean, it's like a dungeon boss except without any positioning mechanics so the whole thing is (almost) just a practice of numbers. Kind of pointless overall. Making them entirely invulnerable is probably fine.

    No opinion on the event, wasn't present.
  • EsoneyunaEsoneyuna Member Posts: 168 Adept
    Nyana said:
    So, events are hard, and from what little I know of the one tonight(I logged in a couple times on different alts to check on stuff, but didn't have time to participate in any way) - the people that were able to participate really liked it. And that's great. At the same time, I know several people that felt like they couldn't without getting swarmed by 10-15 people, and so didn't bother. 
    For the divine doing them sure, but most events are pre-scripted and nothing players do will actually affect the outcome any more than getting a mention in a newspost. Partly because rolling with the punches players throw you can be impossible to code on the fly, partly cause they need the event to go a certain direction. For players though most events are fairly easy.

    PK is not a problem. Conflict is not a problem. Wanting to play a game but feeling it is impossible to do so because of griefing and/or ridiculous mechanics... is a problem. Participating in an event is if both sides showed up, made some reasonable attempt to do X thing, and one of them failed. From what I could tell from checking four different orgs, that didn't happen. 

    In part, because this community is so tiny, it means that stacking numbers on one side is an easy way to win any "important" conflict, especially when you have advance notice when it will happen. That wouldn't necessarily be a problem, if there was more of a desire to include people from both sides. Conflict events don't have to be 100% pk from start to finish. But changing this mentality would require motivation from both admin and the playerbase to do so. 
    I don't know what happend in terms of the Glom side of the event, but I had a feeling they were left hanging for quite a bit. Someone enters their territory to kill an NPC, so naturally they were going to respond, naturally this was going to be violent. If their experience is similar to my experience with the Mysrai-Czixi conflict then essentially one side got all the RP and interaction while the other at most got one vague instruction and was forgotten about even though they had more people willing to participate. For the record Gaudiguch still had no closure whatsoever on the Mysrai - Czixi event of what 1 or 2 years ago? When you do it with a combat able org like Glomdoring during their prime time, well they going to force themselves in.

    Side issue, the numbers imbalance allowing for attacks on supermobs, where it's 15 people versus... 5. Problems I have with this:
    Smobs require 15 people (and seemingly more seeing how this version went) and you can't have to much opposition. They are essentially made to kill this way and having enough forces to do it is a rare thing. It is a big design flaw but it is what it is and you can't blaim people from trying to exploit that. Especially since there are actually dailycredit rewards for killing them. Aka the admins want you to kill them. Also really they had nothing left to do, no event line of their own and a divine killing them trying to hinder the opposition in the widely advertised lusternian event.

    - It made no sense in the context of this event to do that. Yes I know the reason is "because we can, because the mechanics support it"(almost) - but it's not organic conflict, it's just a tedious burden for the people on the absent/currently playing alts on the winning side group. If the community was larger and numbers were more or less the same on both sides at any given time, this would, again, not be a problem.
    A magnagorian did attack Glomdoring's prime commune. So a retaliatory strike is not really unorganic. That being said the wish to kill demon lords has been growing the last few weeks.

    - It punishes people for showing up to divine events. Hell, it punishes the divine for having them, because the griefed side will stop showing up and/or complain about those same divine. And while I think the event might have gone differently if 15+ people from one side hadn't been waiting for it to start, it still was completely reasonable for it to have BEEN announced in advance. 

    I know the attempt on the supermobs failed. The attempt itself still demoralized people who otherwise wanted to play. That's a bad mechanic for conflict, because it doesn't lead to reasonable pk conflict later on, either. No one is going to try to take them down when numbers are even and conflict would actually be interesting... so what is the point of it? Either the supermob battles should require a fair competition between competing players(however we might define that) or eliminate the mechanic altogether.

    Griefing people away from events is also a terrible mechanic for conflict, but there's no code fix for it. There needs to be more of a push to interact with(not just pk) players from other orgs. Treating other PLAYERS as enemies to be eliminated will drive them away from the game. That benefits no one.

    Offer any suggestions for change in comments.
    The only way to make people do smobs at fair numbers is to weaken them or make them grow weaker as more allies of the smob are in the realm. Both are very abuseable. For example if they are too weak they would die constantly (this is most annoying for Hallifax and Gaudiguch) or you have the smob allies QQing to make them stronger. It is also hard to do cause of alliances. An alternative that might be possible is that you 'announce' your intent to kill the smobs and what time to the system (at least 24 hours in advance). At that time the smob will become vulnerable. During the 24 hours twitter and the like advertises. However this also makes it impossible for smaller orgs to ever have a chance to kill smobs. IMO changing it so smobs dying only results in the power stealing from the nexus and no other punishment (so no loss of skills, no losing flesh/crystals) and a maximum term of 1 weave (eg if nobody raises them they auto raise after 1 weave) would make it more tolerable. Though knowing lusternia it might make it worse so. I just want to leave with this thought: events that focus one side but affect the other side in their rp or mechanically without giving them their own equal interaction is always going to frustrate players and cause them to try and disrupt the event. Please stop these onesided events that "hurt" the other side without properly involving the other side.
  • JolantheJolanthe Member Posts: 360 Virtuoso
    IMO the biggest problem here is it really should have been an order vs order thing, but with how it was "advertised" via twitter or whatever it was made to sound like something everyone should hop in on and get messy with. No idea what the announce was, as I'm only hearing about that aspect now.
  • RegatRegat Member Posts: 18 Inept
    This event has been interesting to say the least. 


    I initially created Regat a while ago because I was curious about this famed Glomdoring toxicity that I keep hearing about. With a few specific people departing for greener pastures , I thought I might test the waters and see how toxic they had become. Using RNG and coinflips,  I picked a guild, a class, and a warrior spec plus a tertiary, then basing my race (dwarf) on my randomly chosen spec (axelord). Entirely sublimating any prior knowledge of Glomdoring, its people and any prior interactions or experiences with the Wyrd, I jumped right in with a minimal amount of lessons and credits to see what I could make of myself.

    At no point have I seen any sort of actual toxicity since being in the commune. Aside some snarky comments in our ooc commune clan, nothing "toxic" has been done, icly or oocly.


    Between the two alliances, Crux is quick to look for reasons to try to win,  while IHC is quick to look for reasons to give up or not even try. Crux is quick to give feedback or appreciation when someone does something, while IHC is not. Crux goes out of its way to quell arguments between alliancemates, while IHC does not. Crux goes out of its way to coordinate between all members, even making sure that underrepresented alliance groups get shares of wildnodes/anomalies, while IHC does not; at least, not to the rate that Crux does. Crux simply has a Can-Do attitude. IHC, step up your game or quit whining when you don't win. You can't simultaneously qq when you don't win and also complain that others do the same.

    [[[I know the attempt on the supermobs failed. The attempt itself still demoralized people who otherwise wanted to play. - Nyana]]]

    That's not the raiders' fault. That's the fault of your leaders who didn't go out of their way to call people to follow up and go drive people away. That's the fault of your older players not giving instructions on what to do in cases like this. That's the fault of your city for not replacing your inactive leader and putting someone in charge who is willing to take charge and bark put orders. That's the fault of your players who think all Magnagora is about is staring down your nose at peasants, or back handing demons as rp. Inanna is wasted on you lot.

    As for one sided events, we literally had a god steal an item from another god (with no way to stop it), two weeks of not knowing what we can do about it, and frustration boiling over until people raided a godrealm.

    When the event started, I snuck into Maylea's realm to scout around for some way to strike back at her, and was attacked by four people at once, also netting myself three enemy statuses as well for "raiding". If you want to talk about fairness and driving people away, maybe look at your own orgs and wonder why you instantly attacked me instead of roleplaying at me. You'd have received much more in the way of interactions and rp as opposed to wanton slaughter.
  • RegatRegat Member Posts: 18 Inept
    And as I understand it, Mayleans got ordermobs out of this event. Isn't serenwilde all about cycles and growth,  life turning into death and then life again? Your peacock laid eggs, and then died like some kind of metaphorical phoenix of sorts, and you're sad about it instead of rping it out.
  • NyanaNyana Member Posts: 126 Capable
    Regat said:
    And as I understand it, Mayleans got ordermobs out of this event. Isn't serenwilde all about cycles and growth,  life turning into death and then life again? Your peacock laid eggs, and then died like some kind of metaphorical phoenix of sorts, and you're sad about it instead of rping it out.
    If you can't stick to the premise I posed, please don't comment. Who is "you?" I'm the one who wrote this, and I didn't have the time or motivation to participate. The peacock dying means nothing to me, as I didn't know it existed until afterwards. 
  • NyanaNyana Member Posts: 126 Capable
    Regat said:
    At no point have I seen any sort of actual toxicity since being in the commune. Aside some snarky comments in our ooc commune clan, nothing "toxic" has been done, icly or oocly.
    That you don't see it does not mean others don't, or that it doesn't exist. 
    Between the two alliances, Crux is quick to look for reasons to try to win,  while IHC is quick to look for reasons to give up or not even try. Crux is quick to give feedback or appreciation when someone does something, while IHC is not. Crux goes out of its way to quell arguments between alliancemates, while IHC does not. Crux goes out of its way to coordinate between all members, even making sure that underrepresented alliance groups get shares of wildnodes/anomalies, while IHC does not; at least, not to the rate that Crux does. Crux simply has a Can-Do attitude. IHC, step up your game or quit whining when you don't win. You can't simultaneously qq when you don't win and also complain that others do the same.
    That is a ridiculously one sided characterization of a broad range of conversations on both sides spanning vastly different events, some of which IHC won and some of which they did not. It is very easy to sit back and say "try harder" when numbers are on your side. And this event? Not about IHC. Stick to the premise.

    That's not the raiders' fault. That's the fault of your leaders who didn't go out of their way to call people to follow up and go drive people away. That's the fault of your older players not giving instructions on what to do in cases like this. 
    No, faulty pseudo-quests and poor conflict mechanisms are not the fault of the raiders' or the leaders on either side. Ridiculous statement that doesn't address the premise.
    As for one sided events, we literally had a god steal an item from another god (with no way to stop it), two weeks of not knowing what we can do about it, and frustration boiling over until people raided a godrealm.
    You're implying that an event started by a god is the fault of the players, and thus you're justified in griefing them? That's absurd. 
    you
    No. I can check again, but my logs show that I wasn't there. Stick to the premise. I wrote this myself, with my keyboard and my thoughts and my frustrations.
  • NyanaNyana Member Posts: 126 Capable
    Jolanthe said:
    IMO the biggest problem here is it really should have been an order vs order thing, but with how it was "advertised" via twitter or whatever it was made to sound like something everyone should hop in on and get messy with. No idea what the announce was, as I'm only hearing about that aspect now.
    Completely agree, though it's still sad that this is, supposedly, how it "had" to end up. There could have been agreement among players to keep the conflict among the orders, or to allow both sides to roleplay - even with each other - before attacking.
  • EsoneyunaEsoneyuna Member Posts: 168 Adept
    Lief said:
    Regat said:
    And as I understand it, Mayleans got ordermobs out of this event. Isn't serenwilde all about cycles and growth,  life turning into death and then life again? Your peacock laid eggs, and then died like some kind of metaphorical phoenix of sorts, and you're sad about it instead of rping it out.
    As someone who plays a character in Maylea's order, I wanted to say something in response to this! I hope it's not too tangential.

    The event on our side was us RPing it out. My character Lief is devastated, as she believes the taking of Shashi's life is not in any way a reasonable response to the theft of an item and the conflict between those two gods. Maylea started it, but Lief has reasons for thinking Maylea's actions were warranted and the shape of the retaliation not. Whether those reasons hold water OOC for reasonable people doesn't matter because we don't have OOC gods with centuries-long+ grudges actively involving their pawns/worshipers in their interpersonal conflicts like in Greek times, so it's hard to have a basis of reasonable comparison there. And RPwise, it's a fun stance for me to take with her!

    OOC, the only issues I personally had were the lead up, where so much PvP was happening in the godrealm that I was initially scared to get involved when it was time to get involved, and the way that some people seemed to think it was unfair that Maylea expressed her grief by killing them - after they successfully killed Feyr - because they thought Feyr/Lief (and Jarel I guess, though I didn't see when he entered) vs their ten was a fair go. I know that wasn't the universal attitude from the raiding side, but it bothers me that there are those who felt that way OOC and I think that's what this thread is for discussing.

    I'm not upset the event happened! And I'm not upset by how the event happened. I thought it was really cool personally that things came full circle in a way with Rancoura, and I think the event makes the beast we now get infinitely more meaningful than randomly getting a cool new option and that's that. I'm even glad it was announced ahead of time because I might not have rearranged my day to be able to make it without a heads up otherwise. I'm sad OOC too because Shashi was such a delightful character, and we won't get to RP with him anymore, but it was really, really great storytelling that causes me to be sad about that.

    RP is 100% happening!
    The lead up was actually caused by your side though, you guys raided Glomdoring, they responded. Do you really expect them to go oh well we'll just let that slide. She also killed someone after Feyr -declared- them and killed them so oocly that was just WTF. I think what happened with the zappings there should never allowed and this is a textbook example of not giving the other side a fair go at an event that involves them. You have some world emotes about their god being robbed, you have a lead up of hey this event is going down tonight, and then when it is time for the conclusion it was just a hey glom yeah you are not invited you will just have to deal with being spectators. I think that kind of thing is actually far more damaging to Lusternia then anything else.


  • RegatRegat Member Posts: 18 Inept
    Nyana said:
    Regat said:
    And as I understand it, Mayleans got ordermobs out of this event. Isn't serenwilde all about cycles and growth,  life turning into death and then life again? Your peacock laid eggs, and then died like some kind of metaphorical phoenix of sorts, and you're sad about it instead of rping it out.
    If you can't stick to the premise I posed, please don't comment. Who is "you?" I'm the one who wrote this, and I didn't have the time or motivation to participate. The peacock dying means nothing to me, as I didn't know it existed until afterwards. 
    If a small paragraph mentions a group of people, it's a safe bet that "you" is being used as a collective pronoun. In this case,  "you" refers to Mayleans.
  • EsoneyunaEsoneyuna Member Posts: 168 Adept
    edited September 9
    Xenthos said:
    Esoneyuna said:
     I just want to leave with this thought: events that focus one side but affect the other side in their rp or mechanically without giving them their own equal interaction is always going to frustrate players and cause them to try and disrupt the event. Please stop these onesided events that "hurt" the other side without properly involving the other side.

    I get where you're coming from with the last statement.  Glomdoring's been in an event desert for RL years, so of course we're going to show up when there's something in the offing (I think our last Glom related event was guildhalls opening).  BUT I would like to add that this time the event does seem to be going both ways; Maylea assaulted Nocht, Nocht had us assault one of Maylea's prized creatures in return.  It's going back and forth.  In the interim we didn't have a lot of guidance, admittedly; our instruction was basically "Assault Maylea and her things until next I return."
    That said, Nocht's showing up and the messages we got were well written and there is more to come.  I don't think anyone in Glomdoring's feeling at all upset by having had Event Stuff.  This event has not been feeling all one-sided to me so far.  I'm still pretty hyped about having had something go on we could throw into and how much enthusiasm there was for Glomdoring Happenings in general, and we all have to wait to see what's in store for us next!

    Well I admit my view is largely painted by the fact I went through as Mysrian and Gaudiguch's general lack of any (RP) active divine. And that frustration is only fuelled by the entire fact several orgs get 2-3 active rp divine and regular events.

    I am glad though that it at least seems you guys are not going to have to go through the same thing. If it is a back and forth that is great
  • RegatRegat Member Posts: 18 Inept
    Lief said:
    Regat said:
    And as I understand it, Mayleans got ordermobs out of this event. Isn't serenwilde all about cycles and growth,  life turning into death and then life again? Your peacock laid eggs, and then died like some kind of metaphorical phoenix of sorts, and you're sad about it instead of rping it out.
    As someone who plays a character in Maylea's order, I wanted to say something in response to this! I hope it's not too tangential.

    The event on our side was us RPing it out. My character Lief is devastated, as she believes the taking of Shashi's life is not in any way a reasonable response to the theft of an item and the conflict between those two gods. Maylea started it, but Lief has reasons for thinking Maylea's actions were warranted and the shape of the retaliation not. Whether those reasons hold water OOC for reasonable people doesn't matter because we don't have OOC gods with centuries-long+ grudges actively involving their pawns/worshipers in their interpersonal conflicts like in Greek times, so it's hard to have a basis of reasonable comparison there. And RPwise, it's a fun stance for me to take with her!

    OOC, the only issues I personally had were the lead up, where so much PvP was happening in the godrealm that I was initially scared to get involved when it was time to get involved, and the way that some people seemed to think it was unfair that Maylea expressed her grief by killing them - after they successfully killed Feyr - because they thought Feyr/Lief (and Jarel I guess, though I didn't see when he entered) vs their ten was a fair go. I know that wasn't the universal attitude from the raiding side, but it bothers me that there are those who felt that way OOC and I think that's what this thread is for discussing.

    I'm not upset the event happened! And I'm not upset by how the event happened. I thought it was really cool personally that things came full circle in a way with Rancoura, and I think the event makes the beast we now get infinitely more meaningful than randomly getting a cool new option and that's that. I'm even glad it was announced ahead of time because I might not have rearranged my day to be able to make it without a heads up otherwise. I'm sad OOC too because Shashi was such a delightful character, and we won't get to RP with him anymore, but it was really, really great storytelling that causes me to be sad about that.

    RP is 100% happening!
    I had a really strong urge to reach out to you about this icly, and it may still happen. After my aforementioned, ill-fated foray into your godrealm at the beginning of the event, I made a more secretive exploration. I inspected the fish, checked out the various mounds and special trees, and came across Shashi. After a bit of pondering,  I hatched a plot and sent it to Rancoura, whereas Nocht would make some sort of cage to lock Shashi up and kidnap him (?), holding him for ransom in exchange for Nocht's shroud and a cure for the infection Maylea gave him that literally has roots and flowers growing through his system. My theory was that Maylea would hold Shashi's life in higher regard than a shroud and her pride.

    It didn't end up that way, and I'm sorry. Nocht and Maylea did their own thing, and despite the heavy pk on one side in retaliation for the theft and attack, both sides benefitted from the event. I wish the event had had more rp on our side, and less hacky-slashy mess, because I originally envisioned Regat as a ritualistic sort of rp character, and he ended up getting CR6 in a few weeks because he's good at swinging an axe.
  • RegatRegat Member Posts: 18 Inept
    As an aside:

    [[[Maylea expressed her grief by killing them - after they successfully killed Feyr - because they thought Feyr/Lief.]]]

    I killed Feyr on prime. I killed him because he declared me on prime and attacked me, and kept trying to deathprophesy me. I don't hold it against Maylea for killing me whether I had killed Feyr or not, because actions have consequences and life isn't always supposed to be fair.
  • XenthosXenthos Shadow Lord Member Posts: 6,759 Transcendent
    edited September 9
    One last thought in (partial) defense of Maylea: Gods do have some prerogatives in defending their chosen mortals if they're in the room RPing with them.  So zapping a couple of people was entirely within her right to do.  It seemed that she went a little overboard with that (but ICly, Maylea was probably hurting pretty miserably, so I'm fine rolling with it on an OOC basis too).
    The only thing that I find truly questionable was her zapping Regat when Feyr declared Regat on Prime and got killed.  That one shouldn't have happened.  I suspect it is more a matter of Maylea-the-player not knowing that is what happened and an OOC note to Regat probably wouldn't go amiss there to clear things up.  Other than that, her actions were pretty reasonable on an IC-basis and I can't really hold it against the player at all.
    For future reference, Divine Mandate of the room and a "Leave.  Now.  Lest I slay you all" warning before relaxing the Mandate could work too and avoid the appearance of just GodSmiting things.  I'm not sure she had time to consider that in this case because we were just suddenly there.
    Edit: Also, we know the difference between Feyr/Lief.  We went in specifically targeting Feyr.
    image
  • NyanaNyana Member Posts: 126 Capable

    Esoneyuna said:
     For the divine doing them sure, but most events are pre-scripted and nothing players do will actually affect the outcome any more than getting a mention in a newspost. Partly because rolling with the punches players throw you can be impossible to code on the fly, partly cause they need the event to go a certain direction. For players though most events are fairly easy.
    Right, Esoneyuna. The entire point of my making that statement was to attempt to suggest to Nocht and Maylea, who may both read this post, that I was not blaming them personally for the frustrations of some of the players over the event. But sure, that is how events work. Thanks.
    I don't know what happend in terms of the Glom side of the event
    Ok. Whatever did or didn't happen is outside the premise of this post.
    It is a big design flaw but it is what it is and you can't blaim people from trying to exploit that.
    I study cyber security and my general attitude is that people should never be blamed for exploiting flaws, deliberately or otherwise. The flaws should be fixed. That's the premise of this post. 
    Especially since there are actually dailycredit rewards for killing them. Aka the admins want you to kill them. 
    Are you saying the credit rewards should be removed for this or that it's impossible to earn dailycredits without killing supermobs? Either way... that's not a real argument.
    The only way to make people do smobs at fair numbers is to weaken them or make them grow weaker as more allies of the smob are in the realm. Both are very abuseable.
    If it's abusable then it would not encourage fair numbers or fair conflict. So neither is a solution, and the later would definitely be abused.

    An alternative that might be possible is that you 'announce' your intent to kill the smobs and what time to the system (at least 24 hours in advance). At that time the smob will become vulnerable. During the 24 hours twitter and the like advertises. However this also makes it impossible for smaller orgs to ever have a chance to kill smobs.

    IMO changing it so smobs dying only results in the power stealing from the nexus and no other punishment (so no loss of skills, no losing flesh/crystals) and a maximum term of 1 weave (eg if nobody raises them they auto raise after 1 weave) would make it more tolerable. Though knowing lusternia it might make it worse so. I just want to leave with this thought: events that focus one side but affect the other side in their rp or mechanically without giving them their own equal interaction is always going to frustrate players and cause them to try and disrupt the event. Please stop these onesided events that "hurt" the other side without properly involving the other side.   

    Eh, power loss can be a big deal too. It would be a bit better if they regenerated on their own, though. I sort of like the idea of a time frame behind it, if there was something to do(on both sides) during it that wasn't just 'stand here for x amount of time'. 

    I don't know if the event was one-sided or not, I don't get the impression that Maylea's order had any more information beforehand than Nocht's did. 

  • RegatRegat Member Posts: 18 Inept
    Nyana said:
    No. I can check again, but my logs show that I wasn't there. Stick to the premise. I wrote this myself, with my keyboard and my thoughts and my frustrations.


    Not every post is about you, princess. That post was specifically directed at people in Maylea's order.
  • NyanaNyana Member Posts: 126 Capable
    Regat said:
    Nyana said:
    Regat said:
    And as I understand it, Mayleans got ordermobs out of this event. Isn't serenwilde all about cycles and growth,  life turning into death and then life again? Your peacock laid eggs, and then died like some kind of metaphorical phoenix of sorts, and you're sad about it instead of rping it out.
    If you can't stick to the premise I posed, please don't comment. Who is "you?" I'm the one who wrote this, and I didn't have the time or motivation to participate. The peacock dying means nothing to me, as I didn't know it existed until afterwards. 
    If a small paragraph mentions a group of people, it's a safe bet that "you" is being used as a collective pronoun. In this case,  "you" refers to Mayleans.
    Mayleans are not the premise.
  • PheebePheebe Member Posts: 28 Novice
    Reeling back the condescending attitude might help.
  • NyanaNyana Member Posts: 126 Capable
    Regat said:
    Nyana said:
    No. I can check again, but my logs show that I wasn't there. Stick to the premise. I wrote this myself, with my keyboard and my thoughts and my frustrations.


    Not every post is about you, princess. That post was specifically directed at people in Maylea's order.
    Then start your own thread about Maylea's order, please.
  • KalnidKalnid Member Posts: 553 Fabled

    Xenthos said:
     Glomdoring's been in an event desert for RL years, so of course we're going to show up when there's something in the offing (I think our last Glom related event was guildhalls opening).
    This is incorrect.
  • NyanaNyana Member Posts: 126 Capable
    Xenthos said:
    For future reference, Divine Mandate of the room and a "Leave.  Now.  Lest I slay you all" warning before relaxing the Mandate could work too and avoid the appearance of just GodSmiting things.  I'm not sure she had time to consider that in this case because we were just suddenly there.
    I don't think it's really fair to tell a god what they should have done differently in response to circumstances that they probably didn't anticipate completely, when you don't have perfect knowledge either of the event. People take the best option they see available, even if retrospectively plenty others will tell them that they were obviously wrong. I don't know the context of the Regat-killing, but from what I heard/saw, her actions seemed reasonable for what was happening.
  • LiefLief Member Posts: 326 Fabled
    Esoneyuna said:
    Lief said:
    Regat said:
    And as I understand it, Mayleans got ordermobs out of this event. Isn't serenwilde all about cycles and growth,  life turning into death and then life again? Your peacock laid eggs, and then died like some kind of metaphorical phoenix of sorts, and you're sad about it instead of rping it out.
    As someone who plays a character in Maylea's order, I wanted to say something in response to this! I hope it's not too tangential.

    The event on our side was us RPing it out. My character Lief is devastated, as she believes the taking of Shashi's life is not in any way a reasonable response to the theft of an item and the conflict between those two gods. Maylea started it, but Lief has reasons for thinking Maylea's actions were warranted and the shape of the retaliation not. Whether those reasons hold water OOC for reasonable people doesn't matter because we don't have OOC gods with centuries-long+ grudges actively involving their pawns/worshipers in their interpersonal conflicts like in Greek times, so it's hard to have a basis of reasonable comparison there. And RPwise, it's a fun stance for me to take with her!

    OOC, the only issues I personally had were the lead up, where so much PvP was happening in the godrealm that I was initially scared to get involved when it was time to get involved, and the way that some people seemed to think it was unfair that Maylea expressed her grief by killing them - after they successfully killed Feyr - because they thought Feyr/Lief (and Jarel I guess, though I didn't see when he entered) vs their ten was a fair go. I know that wasn't the universal attitude from the raiding side, but it bothers me that there are those who felt that way OOC and I think that's what this thread is for discussing.

    I'm not upset the event happened! And I'm not upset by how the event happened. I thought it was really cool personally that things came full circle in a way with Rancoura, and I think the event makes the beast we now get infinitely more meaningful than randomly getting a cool new option and that's that. I'm even glad it was announced ahead of time because I might not have rearranged my day to be able to make it without a heads up otherwise. I'm sad OOC too because Shashi was such a delightful character, and we won't get to RP with him anymore, but it was really, really great storytelling that causes me to be sad about that.

    RP is 100% happening!
    The lead up was actually caused by your side though, you guys raided Glomdoring, they responded. Do you really expect them to go oh well we'll just let that slide. She also killed someone after Feyr -declared- them and killed them so oocly that was just WTF. I think what happened with the zappings there should never allowed and this is a textbook example of not giving the other side a fair go at an event that involves them. You have some world emotes about their god being robbed, you have a lead up of hey this event is going down tonight, and then when it is time for the conclusion it was just a hey glom yeah you are not invited you will just have to deal with being spectators. I think that kind of thing is actually far more damaging to Lusternia then anything else.


    I'm sorry that happened in the lead up! What I'm aware of happening is this:

    Lief started influencing godrealm mobs, and then got invited to watch a really awesome Hallifax play (<3). After the play finished, she went back to influencing mobs, and then Xenthos entered to raid as people sometimes do to one another. Lief let Serenwilde know, and another member of Maylea's order, Pysynne, came to defend while Lief continued to influence. Things escalated from there.

    There was no communication about a raid on our side, so I'm not sure how "you guys raided" is a thing, and I'm not sure when it happened in the timeline of the above which drove me out of the godrealm in the lead up. I know one person attacked and killed a Glomdoring mob (though Lief didn't know about this happening at all), and I found out after the fact, mostly through the posts here.

    What would have made the raiding side happy instead of Maylea killing them? I can't envision another outcome with the people online besides their ideal outcome being "we kill people while their god watches and then we take over the event with a god who won't attack people much smaller than them"? I don't see another way for Maylea's order to have been allowed to participate at all beyond what happened, but I could be wrong? Maybe some people in the party would have been eager to RP it out, and I think that could have been really cool...but the raiding party came in with guns blazing. People entered and immediately attacked.
    A gentle breeze ruffles your wings and whispers in your ears, as if for you alone, "Dragonfly's words shine... seeds, sown and tended, inspire... a forest harvest."

    ~

    Maylea reaches out, Her fingers poised in midair. "Now you are of Me, even more than you were before." Her golden and azure eyes glitter. "Walk well, Eldin. Shed glory in My name, and bring life to the lifeless."
  • XenthosXenthos Shadow Lord Member Posts: 6,759 Transcendent
    Kalnid said:

    Xenthos said:
     Glomdoring's been in an event desert for RL years, so of course we're going to show up when there's something in the offing (I think our last Glom related event was guildhalls opening).
    This is incorrect.
    Which one am I overlooking?  It is quite possible that I am, but even Ascension events the last couple of years largely skipped Glom (excepting for being "part of the Basin in general").  We had the greev and old guilds dying, we had Baeroc Spineson 2 Ascensions ago who showed up, did a tapestry, and peaced out (we are still waiting for the resolution on that), and we had new guildhalls, to my recollection.
    In other thoughts: Would anyone be seriously dismayed if the SMOB raiding just went away entirely?  It has come up before.  I personally have no objections.  The time to fix it (and effort) is way out of proportion to what it takes to kill them in general.
    image
  • XenthosXenthos Shadow Lord Member Posts: 6,759 Transcendent
    edited September 9
    Nyana said:
    Xenthos said:
    For future reference, Divine Mandate of the room and a "Leave.  Now.  Lest I slay you all" warning before relaxing the Mandate could work too and avoid the appearance of just GodSmiting things.  I'm not sure she had time to consider that in this case because we were just suddenly there.
    I don't think it's really fair to tell a god what they should have done differently in response to circumstances that they probably didn't anticipate completely, when you don't have perfect knowledge either of the event. People take the best option they see available, even if retrospectively plenty others will tell them that they were obviously wrong. I don't know the context of the Regat-killing, but from what I heard/saw, her actions seemed reasonable for what was happening.
    Isn't that... exactly what I said?  Specifically the very last sentence in what you quoted states that sentiment outright.  The rest of the post defends her right to do what she did (mostly).
    image
This discussion has been closed.