A Discussion

[noaim]

Why do some people insist on hearing more from Requiel about this part?

Because he asked for a debate, but this thread could just aswell be named "Are AC raids ok?" like the 514 other threads on the same topic. Should just merge it with the another thread and tell him to stick to the existing threads and stop spamming if he doesnt intend to reply in it, since this is just another pointless thread until GOA replies to what people have said.

You dont see Sivert Öholm (non swedes might not know who he is) invite 2 people who has different opinions, ask em how they feel then leave the studio, because thats not a debate (well it is, but its an uncontrolled debate, much like this one, and we already have plenty of those), it is completely useless.

 

[IainC]

Ok, thanks for all the feedback so far. I've read through and been quite ruthless with the purge stick in this thread. All the flames and counter flames have been cut out as have the off topic and +1 posts. If I cut your reply and there was a relevant on topic point in there then repost it without the baggage please. This isn't a thread for scoring leetness points or attacking other people, it's a thread where people who feel strongly about it can put their views forwards without reference to any particular episode. It's also not about suggesting game mechanics to 'fix' AC raids. If you have strong views or ideas on that topic then open up the feedback form on the Camelot Herald and let Mythic know what you want. I'm also not particularly interested in debating what constitutes an AC raid, who did them first or who deserves what.

On with replies to a few points then.

The TT incident.
I kind of blew that off earlier in the thread, not because I don't want to talk about it ever again, but because I want to keep it separate from this issue. People didnt suddenly become upset over AC raids because of that episode, the strong feelings and the divisive attitudes were there already. I want people to talk about why they don't like AC raids or why they feel that AC raids are legitimate rather than getting sidetracked onto specific episodes that were only tangientally to do with that.

AC as grief play.
In my opening post I said that I didn't consider AC raids as grief play. I still don't but I'll try and explain that. I read the definition posted by Sharkith earlier which also came up in the long RightNow conversation I had with him. I don't honestly believe that a simple mechanical definition of grief play exists. When we look at grief play complaints, we consider two main criteria: Action and motive. If the action is legitimate (which it usually is otherwise the situation becomes more clear cut as they will be cheating rather than griefing) then the motive must be suspect for it to be considered grief play. Motive is a difficult thing to judge unless the people involved are being unusually open. Then we have to consider what motives count as suspect. In some cases it's obvious, in others it comes down toa judgement call. I don't believe you can categorise motivations into simple blocks as there are as many subtle differences as there are people who hold them. Sometimes it's obvious of course in other cases it isn't so clear and in these cases we have to hold in mind that we are setting a precedent and that we will need to be consistent with future interpretations of that precedent.
All of this long preamble serves to set up the point. If people are playing the game in the way it's intended to be played purely for the sake of playing the game then they are not griefing. The difference with the TT incident (yes I broke my own rule - bite me) is that in our view the individuals were not playing the game in the way it was meant to be played.

Population issues.
I would entirely accept that AC raids would stop being an issue if populations were higher if there hadn't always been the antipathy and name calling even when the servers were full every night. Even when there were defenders around the clock, there was drama regarding AC raids. The attitudes have become more entrenched over time - as they have on a lot of contentious issues - but the potential for conflict has always been there. I do agree though that the situation is made worse by low population even if a high population isn't a cure. Ways to remedy population issues though are a matter for a different thread.

Morale on underpopulated realms.
This is a very fair point. I can understand the points made by the Hibs in this post such as Raven and others. The dynamic for Hib vs other realms is very different to the Alb v Mid struggles as either of those two realms can put together a viable relic force as needed. The problem here is that I'm not sure that a solution that discriminates between realms is workable. Underpopulated realms already get BP subsidys which - in theory - make it possible for them to maintain as strong a defence as larger realms. While that's not always the case it is sometimes the case. Making offpeak keep takes harder has to be balanced with primetime raids still being possible.

NF vs OF Sieges and Relic Raids.
Again, this comes down to a design decision from Mythic. If we accept that there is unlikely to be a major overhaul of the frontiers system then we have to play the hand we've been dealt. I can understand and sympathise with the points that were made though. Personally I have to say that I prefer NF sieges but OF Relic raids. Any change in this area would have to come from Mythic and would need to be a solution that could be applied to all servers from Bossiney cluster to Cumbria.


Unfortunately tomorrow I'm flying to Milan to promote the game to Italian journalists and on Friday I'm off on holiday for 3 weeks so I won't be able to take as active a part in this discussion as I'd like. I will however keep reading this thread when I get the chance and will respond as I can. Just don't expect me to be sat spamming f5 to respond to every point.

 

[Arethir]

AC as grief play.
Sorry, but you failed to answer Sharkith's question. As you see the players who have done some of these AC raids have admitted they did it intentionally to grief players of the other realms. Is that considered grief play, or is it not? Their motive was griefing and e-peen fencing.

 

[Shike]

fair enough tbh. You made your points quite clear. I disagree with the griefingpart somewhat but ok.

Regarding what can be done, its actually not very hard at all, put in a proper defense that a full group or two cannot take down. Like in OF, you had to be very very good at aggromanagement and know exactly what you did if you was to sneak in and do a ninjaraid with a small force and even then it wasnt really viable with a full group, id say around 30+ people could do it relatively easy without resistance from the opposing realm. Now, its just far too easy to do. The whole relicconcept kindof fall flat with the current design since ACs can be done so easily, IF, the servers population is like it is on UKcluster. IF it is like it is on Merlincluster (kilibury), it is not a problem at all since there are people online all the time. With a proper guarddefence that would require around 30 people to fend off primetimeraids are still not really affected since 100 people easily can deal with guards adjusted to defeat <30 players while they still offer a proper defense for the relics vs smaller forces that shouldnt be able to move relics at all without getting slaughtered by guards.

Btw, from a roleplayerperspective, if I was king of a realm, id fire those relicguards faster than you can blink, they suck so darn much and cant defend the realms most precious valued itams vs a full group. Thats just ridicilous actually and they need to go to bootcamp asap!

 

[noaim]

No reply about having hired people or GM´s hold raids etc for realms without relics, or underpopulated realms if relicsituation is even. I think it would bring back alot of people since they would be guaranteed to get action (lets face it, if a GM would make a realmmessage saying he has a bg up for RR on mids in albion, people would join it v fast), and it would prolly make people keep playing too.

 

[Shike]

AC as grief play.
Sorry, but you failed to answer Sharkith's question. As you see the players who have done some of these AC raids have admitted they did it intentionally to grief players of the other realms. Is that considered grief play, or is it not? Their motive was griefing and e-peen fencing.

Here comes the silly thing, Requiel cannot admit that on behalf of GOA. The second he admit AC's can be against the SoTG and be classified as griefing, he shoot GOA in the foot bigtime. If he admitted that ACs can be classified as griefing, then a very complicated delicate problem would appear, namely, a ruleset would be needed. When would it be classified as griefing? Because some jerk dribble about it on FH? Hardly. Iirc things said on a forum is never, ever used against a player. Reason is simply that it cannot be proven that it is the actual owner of an account that say the things on FH with another account. You cannot prove that an AC is made with grief as mainincentive, thus you cannot prove anything worthy of punishment aka a ban so, in which way exactly would it then actually matter? We all already know which the asshats are, we dont need more proof of it and thats all there is to it and thats also all there ever will be to it aswell. GOA wont do anything, the only thing they realistically can do that is within their resources is to adjust the relicdefences but changing that now is like killing a cow twice, there is no real point in the second shot. UKcluster is already bleeding and dying and it wont ever recover so it doesnt matter what GOA do or dont do at this state of things.

Conclusion that can be taken though is, hopefully, Mythic take things like this into consideration when they create WAR.

 

[Shike]

No reply about having hired people or GM´s hold raids etc for realms without relics, or underpopulated realms if relicsituation is even. I think it would bring back alot of people since they would be guaranteed to get action (lets face it, if a GM would make a realmmessage saying he has a bg up for RR on mids in albion, people would join it v fast), and it would prolly make people keep playing too.

lol, that would atually be quite darn funky I'd go at least.

Again, from a RPperspective, the kings are actually very lazy and sitting in that dusty ol room must be very very boring. A GM disguised as Lamfhota leading bloodthirsty hibbs into fight, shit like that would actually make an otherwise very static world come far more alive and dynamic and I think its a shame no company works in that way, yet.

 

[IainC]

Shike.
You're partially right about the reasons we don't declare AC raiding is grief play. If we did make that call then we'd need a transparent policy to back it up. There would have to be clearly understood lines that denoted whether a particular raid was 'griefing' or not. The criteria aren't clear. How do you define an AC raid from the point of view of the CoC? It's not the whole reason though. The major reason isn't that it would be a royal pain to enforce but that it has much wider implications for other aspects of the game and sets a precedent that we aren't currently happy to allow.

To your other point about upping relic guards or putting in additional mechanisms, that boils down to the 'go tell it to Mythic' part of my previous post. I would say though that it's not as easy as it sounds to make a PvE encounter that can't be bypassed somehow. If there were mega guards, I'd give it two weeks max before someone figured out how to make them irrelevant with little additional effort. Players are infinitely more powerful than mobs because they learn and are flexible.

Noaim.
We chose very early on in the game that we would never take sides for or against a realm for an event. The idea does sound very cool and I can't tell you how much I'd love to see an army following their King into the frontiers with strong roleplay over orders and duty and so on. Unfortunately we would simply be making a huge stick to beat ourselves with. If the raid was successful it would be because of superpowered GMs cheating the relic away (even if the GMs were actually normal player characters with just a special skin). We'd be fielding the favouritism and 'you hate my realm' complaints for ever and a day. This is why when we do run RvR events that they are aimed equally at involving all three realms with no perception of us being involved for or against any particular realm. Put simply RvR should be done by players against players, we just make it possible for you to go at it.

Arethir.
I thought I had made it clear that I didn't consider that it was grief play.

 

[Tuthmes]

Because he asked for a debate, but this thread could just aswell be named "Are AC raids ok?" like the 514 other threads on the same topic. Should just merge it with the another thread and tell him to stick to the existing threads and stop spamming if he doesnt intend to reply in it, since this is just another pointless thread until GOA replies to what people have said.

You dont see Sivert Öholm (non swedes might not know who he is) invite 2 people who has different opinions, ask em how they feel then leave the studio, because thats not a debate (well it is, but its an uncontrolled debate, much like this one, and we already have plenty of those), it is completely useless.

Yeh fair enough, but the man asked for an debate. Wether on not he's gonne respond to it futher is a different matter. The mere fact he's asking for it, should say enough that he wants something with it.

Dunno Sivert, cause i'm a none nordic, but in this case it would lead to some interresting develement/discussion of the talkshow if the host would do so. Atleast it would be very clear who got the most valid points.

Anyways OT.
Think what Requiel points out is the most obvious. Can't change the gameplay, thats something you should address MythicAE for. Why as to Requiel can't see the continue's AC'ing, etc as grief play is behond me (playing devils advocate most likely, but hey).
Underpopulation has never bin much of a problem to hibs anyway. Just where far more organized/civil then usual. But the constant AC'ing has broke that to - "hey whats the fking point of doin this?"
Goa can't do anything against it, cause of design. People trying to talk sense into the AC'rs, but they dont care, cause they only wanne see their point/realm.
The dogg keeps on biting, but we love him to much for it to kill/leave it.

 

[Tuthmes]

Shike.
You're partially right about the reasons we don't declare AC raiding is grief play. If we did make that call then we'd need a transparent policy to back it up. There would have to be clearly understood lines that denoted whether a particular raid was 'griefing' or not. The criteria aren't clear. How do you define an AC raid from the point of view of the CoC? It's not the whole reason though. The major reason isn't that it would be a royal pain to enforce but that it has much wider implications for other aspects of the game and sets a precedent that we aren't currently happy to allow.

How you can NOT consider constant AC'ing or even a compleet mindset (defending ren, cause we'll take our relics back at 5 am anyway) to ac'ing grief play?

 

[Shike]

To your other point about upping relic guards or putting in additional mechanisms, that boils down to the 'go tell it to Mythic' part of my previous post. I would say though that it's not as easy as it sounds to make a PvE encounter that can't be bypassed somehow. If there were mega guards, I'd give it two weeks max before someone figured out how to make them irrelevant with little additional effort. Players are infinitely more powerful than mobs because they learn and are flexible..

Guards on a leech so they wont run off and with random aggrocode is all it really takes to be difficult to handle though. Those type of mobs have always been the most difficult to deal with since you cant use regular methods to control aggro. By making them standard guards with the usual aggroset they would be extremely easy to deal with as is any mob that works that way. If someone used some trick to deal with them in a inapproperiate way, then its bugabuse and punishable so that argument doesnt work very well. I cant honestly believe it is hard to adjust and make alot harder, I find it hard to truly believe :/ If that truly is the case, then your tools should be updated.

Ive sent feedback to Mythic many many many! times and regarding this its very hard for Mythic to see the whole picture, they dont read our forum and see the whine every time someone do an AC, they dont know that our cluster is so onesided nighttime, etc. This is where GOA should move in on your own initiative and demand a proper tool or solution to adjust as you see fit. The reason for that demand is simple, to keep the players happy. I dunno but, say what you want about ACs, they aint making an awful lot of people happy are they?

 

[Arethir]

we consider two main criteria: Action and motive. If the action is legitimate (which it usually is otherwise the situation becomes more clear cut as they will be cheating rather than griefing) then the motive must be suspect for it to be considered grief play. Motive is a difficult thing to judge unless the people involved are being unusually open.

In this case, you have seen "the people involved are being unusually open". They say themselves that their motive is grief play. So the action they take, is by their own definition, grief play.
AC'ing and all that apart. When people tell you they did an action to grief other players, who are you to tell them their motive was not to grief other players?
Sorry, but I don't quite follow.
However, feel free not to reply to this post if you like, and I will leave it at this and accept that GoA does not consider any kind of AC'ing, no matter what motive the player has, for grief play.

Edit: Btw, am I very out of line if I suggest a log-in question for pryd/exc cluster, asking whether or not we consider taking relics at late night as a way of playing that should not be allowed? Ie. simply make the relics un-capturable after 2 am or so? I know it's alot to ask, but I personally would very much like to know where the whole of the cluster stands in this position. From reading FH and talking to the players I know in this game, I'd easy guess at above 70% considering AC'ing to be bad for the game, and that it should be stopped by force. But then I don't know the whole cluster and not everyone reads FH, so I would really like to know, and I'm pretty sure alot of other people are interested in this aswell.

 

[Raven]

grief

• noun 1 intense sorrow, especially caused by someone’s death. 2 informal trouble or annoyance.

— PHRASES come to grief have an accident; meet with disaster. good grief! an exclamation of surprise or alarm.

— ORIGIN Old French, from grever ‘to burden’.

http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/grief?view=uk


they have said time and again they have only done it to annoy people, it had nothing to do with the relics, it had everything to do with pissing people off, it is plain for everyone that it was/is grief play.

if you are going to enforce the CoC as harshly as you have done in the past you should suspend them. Some TT members (yes i know you don't want that mentioned) got suspended because they were reported due to a post on here, so you cant use the old excuse "we cant do anything unless we see it happen" yes the keep was lowered but for all you know they could have wanted to save BPs. The only reason you know this to be untrue is because it was said here. You can see that these people (the AC'ers) did it to piss people off from posts on here...

 

[IainC]

Raven.
I'm not going to endlessly debate this because it isn't the point of this thread. However you are incorrect on a number of assumptions. You assume that we had no direct logged evidence as to the motives of the peopel involved and that we only reacted because of complaints on the forum. I said it at the time and I'll say it again, if we did not have absolute evidence for the reason that those two individuals lowered Renaris we would have done nothing. We don't take 'confessions' on a forum into account and neither do we base policy on whine. We investigated using logs and tools from our systems and took action based on a clear indication that a definite line had been crossed. Regardless of why they felt they had to do what they did, their actions were wrong.

Arethir.
AC raids where no-one is cheating will not be declared off limits. LIke you I would also like to see the results of a general poll of the entire community however it's not something I think we would do as it would send out the wrong signals.

Shike.
I'm not even talking about cheating when I mention making an anti-AC mechanism irrelevant. Think of the hardest PvE encounters you can, now think about how many of those can be done with a fg or less. Remember in this case you don't even have to win against the encounter, you just have to not lose for long enough.

Regarding changes to systems, remember that anything implemented would have to be suitable for use on every server. It's vanishingly unlikely that Mythic would make a custom mechanism for individual servers. Can you imagine the whine on a busy cluster if they get told that raids after midnight get more difficult because some servers have low populations?

 

[enkor]

need a "serenety clause" in EU daoc imo

 

[pip]

Raven.
I'm not going to endlessly debate this because it isn't the point of this thread. However you are incorrect on a number of assumptions. You assume that we had no direct logged evidence as to the motives of the peopel involved and that we only reacted because of complaints on the forum. I said it at the time and I'll say it again, if we did not have absolute evidence for the reason that those two individuals lowered Renaris we would have done nothing. We don't take 'confessions' on a forum into account and neither do we base policy on whine. We investigated using logs and tools from our systems and took action based on a clear indication that a definite line had been crossed. Regardless of why they felt they had to do what they did, their actions were wrong.

Arethir.
AC raids where no-one is cheating will not be declared off limits. LIke you I would also like to see the results of a general poll of the entire community however it's not something I think we would do as it would send out the wrong signals.

Shike.
I'm not even talking about cheating when I mention making an anti-AC mechanism irrelevant. Think of the hardest PvE encounters you can, now think about how many of those can be done with a fg or less. Remember in this case you don't even have to win against the encounter, you just have to not lose for long enough.

Regarding changes to systems, remember that anything implemented would have to be suitable for use on every server. It's vanishingly unlikely that Mythic would make a custom mechanism for individual servers. Can you imagine the whine on a busy cluster if they get told that raids after midnight get more difficult because some servers have low populations?

May i ask you if you was a Alb would you ac?

 

[IainC]

May i ask you if you was a Alb would you ac?

As I said in the first post I made:

Firstly let me make the obligatory disclaimer: I don't go on AC raids because I actually enjoy fights and sieges without players on the other side are dull. I'm not averse to taking the odd tower if I happen to be on late at night but only to try and draw out a few defenders and thereby get a fight if possible.

 

[Raven]

if you read his first post you would know he doesn't like it.

anyway, it would be nice if we could call an amnesty to this AC rubbish as its fairly clear to everyone its damaging the server, regardless whether people think AC'ing is fine and fair, clearly the majority disagree.

 

[Haggus]

Ask if i care.. ? he a Gm of this game he should be able to talorate some criticism.
And that was my point of veiw. And i mean what i posted first.. shame it got delted, but i still mean that GoA don't do there work as they should.

I don't wanna flame bait but tbh I think your comment is pathetic.

Anyway, I only read the first page and I agree with Gamah! I think it has alot to do with the respect towards another gamer. Even in the earlier stages of NF people had ALOT of respect for known people. Yeah fair enough you had to make your name for yourself but that wasn't hard. Respect others and they will respect you - Now no one cares who you are. Back in the day high RR was respected. Now everyone is rr11 and they only people that get named are the ones that zerg alot. They get shamed and not named.

I don't know what it is about the game now but somethings missing and I didn't like it so I quit :/

Maybe Req and other admins should have a discussion with the US GMs and see what there doing different or how the player base is acting different. Maybe then you'll find your answer.

Happy hunting

 

[Mambopoa]

This has made me want to register to reply.
(With reference to the low population causing a lot of these problems)

As many others, I read FH but don't bother with the posting due to all the flames.

However here is my point.

Can you please explain why there has been no advertising for DAoC that I have seen over the past four year and are there any plans to advertise?

I see WoW adverts on TV, on MSN and everywhere, yet in my opinion it is not as good as DAoC. I think many more people would enjoy it if they knew about it.

There is an inherent problem that people who have started a game don’t want to start again on another and finish what they have. So we have temporarily lost a lot of people to other MMORPGs. However, from all of my friends, only 2 have continued to play WoW. All others have gone to try other MMORPG due to low population etc. (I don’t need to go over this again.)

GoA did a great video of the game, everyone liked it, yet we never saw it anywhere.

Lots of people now play WoW so there is a market out there, however 95% (I would guess) don’t know of others and hear often by word of mouth.

The only reason I knew of DAoC was through a previous player. If I was to look now, I would only know about WoW and not any other games.

We all pay for an active service and we all believe that it is being provided on an on going basis, yet we don’t see any way of this being promoted.

I have friends who now play Avalon (I am tempted, but recently starting again on Mid I am enjoying that a lot too) still see new players who have never seen the game before. I would be deeply shocked I saw such a thing on the UK cluster.
The only new players who I have met are returning players who have had to purchase a new account.

What are my options?

All I can see is moving to the US servers. I don’t like this option after all the work and play time I have put into my characters who I really like.

I know you probably can not answer this questions, however I do think we all would like to see some action from GoA about promotion of DAoC.

 

[Raven]

several reasons i think, when daoc first came out there were no where near as many people capable of playing MMOs due to lack of decent net connections, decent PCs cost a lot more etc. wow also had a huge following and was produced by a company that had made a fortune from the warcraft series. mythic were relatively unknown (and still are i guess) there was advertising in magazines for SI and i am fairly sure i saw some for TOA too. TV/cinema advertising costs a lot of money, mythic just didnt have that sort of money at the time. I think with EA backing them now and far more people interested in MMOs it will be very different for WAR

 

[Mambopoa]

I understand the principles of a game that has been out now for 5 years. However it is does not look 5 years old.

Plus a lot of these people are not multi players gamers, they have all been introduced within the last 18 months.

That is a lot of people that had no idea about Blizzard or Diablo etc. Yet they are now playing something that is available.

 

[Dard]

Put simply RvR should be done by players against players, we just make it possible for you to go at it.

Unless 90% of them are asleep? then its players Vs NPC's.

With regards to realm guards, can you not move borrow of those rock hard guards from outside Ligen or see if they have twins somwhere who fancy a stint on the night shift, mebbee Behemoth would fancy a night out every now & then (& tbh if 2 fg of anything can kill that they deserve the relics no matter what time of day it is)?

Answering your question about why people left the server .. The a/c-ing played a part in it for me, it gets very boring very quickly when you log in every day & most of your frontier is owned by the enemy, you cant port anywhere & basically your forced into seige-ing your own keeps/ towers back before you do anything else, only to lose them all again when your in bed.

I value my time when i play DAoC & over the years i've enjoyed every aspect of it, huge PvE raids (old school legion (cloaks off everyone!) dragon & Galla raids, I enjoy my RvR, solo-ing, duo-ing, running in small grps & playing in 8v8, i also enjoy the huge battles & well run relic raids & at the end of the day win, lose or draw it was generally good fun & you had a reason to log on again the next day, nowdays you dont have the same reasons & i'm not going to list them because you already know them.

Nowdays i split my time between the US & Avalon, the attitude on both servers is completely different to pryd/excal & maybe it is all down to population, but i do know its more fun there at the moment than it is here (except spending over an hour trying to figure out what scrolls go with what arti's ... that sucks but never mind eh).

Ps .. i didnt enjoy every aspect of the game, crafting sucks

 

[Sharkith]

AC as grief play.
In my opening post I said that I didn't consider AC raids as grief play. I still don't but I'll try and explain that. I read the definition posted by Sharkith earlier which also came up in the long RightNow conversation I had with him. I don't honestly believe that a simple mechanical definition of grief play exists. When we look at grief play complaints, we consider two main criteria: Action and motive. If the action is legitimate (which it usually is otherwise the situation becomes more clear cut as they will be cheating rather than griefing) then the motive must be suspect for it to be considered grief play. Motive is a difficult thing to judge unless the people involved are being unusually open. Then we have to consider what motives count as suspect. In some cases it's obvious, in others it comes down toa judgement call. I don't believe you can categorise motivations into simple blocks as there are as many subtle differences as there are people who hold them. Sometimes it's obvious of course in other cases it isn't so clear and in these cases we have to hold in mind that we are setting a precedent and that we will need to be consistent with future interpretations of that precedent.
All of this long preamble serves to set up the point. If people are playing the game in the way it's intended to be played purely for the sake of playing the game then they are not griefing. The difference with the TT incident (yes I broke my own rule - bite me) is that in our view the individuals were not playing the game in the way it was meant to be played.

Once more respect to you for being so helpful and open. I also appreciate the purging of the thread it is simply an important issue that we need addressed and Mythic need to know about pure and simple.

I accept what you say above and I kind of anticipated your response to this because we had run through it. Now you have said it you have to admit that in fact you agree with the definition I gave you that it is the intent of the player that matters.

The question we should now consider is just how practical the definition is and then we then get to see just how hard your position is over this.

On the notion of grief play you agree with me that you have to be able to read intention and that is obviously going to be very difficult for you to enforce because it opens all sorts of issues up. We had evidence right here in the thread when Manisch and Fatload went at each other of the kind of can of worms this could open up. Would adding or ganking soloers be seen as griefing for example? I think we all know how stupid that debate has been. This is almost the same.

Where you critically miss the point however is that I felt that if a persistent pattern of behaviour existed as your player base perceived there to be that you should immediately try to do something to a) either quell the rumors or b) warn those doing it that their actions because they were repetitive risked being seen as intentially attempting to grief the server.

Showing that you cared and letting people know that the situation was being monitored would have been enough for many people. However having said this I fully appreciate Requiel that you cannot babysit a community and this then brings me to the crux of the issue and the possibility of the solution.

Clearly this is a problem within the community. As part of that community we are all responsible for what happens. Asking for the hosts of the game to arbitrate is impractical. This should have been solved by the community for the community. It could even have been done through roleplay.

What if we had a voluntary charter call it 'sportsmanlike conduct' or something that people could sign up to? That a series of agreed actions following such a raid could be undertaken to avoid such conflict in future. One such action would be lowering the relic keep and all towers - where guilds had agreed to sign up to the charter. The charter could even allow people to defend under the conditions of the lowered keep so that there is still a defence albiet a more sportsmanlike one.

A charter could specify the right procedure to follow that such action could only be taken if the majority of Guild masters had agreed. Clearly then when lowering the keep the intention is not to grief others but to promote fair and decent play on the server. People could even agree to stand aside and publicly state that they will simply not condone attacks like this on the community. That they are signed up to the charter and this outlines their beliefs.

This is within the spirit of the game and what is more it is positive because it is the community trying to work out its own problems with out putting you and GOA in a silly position.

What I was completely surprised by was the honesty of Kagato, Kinetix and Blow. Respect to them for their honestly in this situation because it allows us to try and bring more of this out than we could have otherwise. What I noticed them all saying was that there should be more deliberation and more discussion by TT and I know some TT members could agree now that maybe more discussion would have helped. How do they see what I am suggesting for example?

Clearly there is potential here for a unique solution.

Not the creation of yet more rules but the generation of a way to come together and discuss how to deal with these incidents. Thats all.

If the community could solve it it would speak volumes of that community. You told me that this was unworkable and I actually still believe it is possible. A community problem should be allowed to be sorted out by the community and you should do exactly what your doing now - try to get people to dicuss it meaningfully.

You should also encourage them to reach a meaningful solution. One possible answer was the charter. I am willing to see if others can be developed. I would even help such solutions if people could agree to do it positively.

All servers have their rules and guidelines why we never developed any escapes me.

edited for crappy English (this is what happens when I don't drink!).

 

[Raven]

true they weren't but with more and more access to the internet they are discovering online play. with any mmo it has to evolve more often than not this means adding more content to keep existing players interested and advancing their toon/s. wow appeals to casual players too as its a pve focused game. i think if daoc was released now and was advertised it would blow wow away, if mythic get it right they will do this with WaR (its a big if)

 

[Lorgeil]

I don't wanna flame bait but tbh I think your comment is pathetic.

Anyway, I only read the first page and I agree with Gamah! I think it has alot to do with the respect towards another gamer. Even in the earlier stages of NF people had ALOT of respect for known people. Yeah fair enough you had to make your name for yourself but that wasn't hard. Respect others and they will respect you - Now no one cares who you are. Back in the day high RR was respected. Now everyone is rr11 and they only people that get named are the ones that zerg alot. They get shamed and not named.

I don't know what it is about the game now but somethings missing and I didn't like it so I quit :/

Maybe Req and other admins should have a discussion with the US GMs and see what there doing different or how the player base is acting different. Maybe then you'll find your answer.

Happy hunting

okay.
1. i sent some mails and this was last response i got, and i was asking about breaking the spirit of this game couse i didn't found it fun on UK Clusters.

Response (CM) 12/11/2006 06:13 PM
Hello again,
As we said previously. Taking enemy keeps is not against the rules and we have no plans to make it so.

Yours sincerely,
---------------------------------------------
European Dark Age of Camelot Community Manager
i mean wtf can i use this to when its not that im asking for...?

also had another episode of somthing i dont like about GoA, and that happens to be Requiel.

Went out 1 night in rvr. move bridge to kill some enemeys. And out of the night skys i see guards spamming in the middle of the bridge and i dont mean the crappy yellow orange red guards. i mean those that are at Savu faste. i mean why the hell should i go out in rvr get killed for just travel there... iwould had gone mad if it was a player but a GM ?.. what i got told after asking Requiel was "Becours i don't want to see organised duelling going on. It's lame and against the spirit of the game".. i mean wtf i just arrived to the place.. but i just think im gona keep this to another theard sometimes as it has nothing too do with what he ask'd.

 

[Sharkith]

okay.
1. i sent some mails and this was last response i got, and i was asking about breaking the spirit of this game couse i didn't found it fun on UK Clusters.

Response (CM) 12/11/2006 06:13 PM
Hello again,
As we said previously. Taking enemy keeps is not against the rules and we have no plans to make it so.

Yours sincerely,
---------------------------------------------
European Dark Age of Camelot Community Manager
i mean wtf can i use this to when its not that im asking for...?

also had another episode of somthing i dont like about GoA, and that happens to be Requiel.

Went out 1 night in rvr. move bridge to kill some enemeys. And out of the night skys i see guards spamming in the middle of the bridge and i dont mean the crappy yellow orange red guards. i mean those that are at Savu faste. i mean why the hell should i go out in rvr get killed for just travel there... iwould had gone mad if it was a player but a GM ?.. what i got told after asking Requiel was "Becours i don't want to see organised duelling going on. It's lame and against the spirit of the game".. i mean wtf i just arrived to the place.. but i just think im gona keep this to another theard sometimes as it has nothing too do with what he ask'd.

Lorgeil if you have personal problems with Requiel I for one would appreciate it if you would calm down and take that to PM's. Please.

 

[Raven]

okay.
1. i sent some mails and this was last response i got, and i was asking about breaking the spirit of this game couse i didn't found it fun on UK Clusters.

Response (CM) 12/11/2006 06:13 PM
Hello again,
As we said previously. Taking enemy keeps is not against the rules and we have no plans to make it so.

Yours sincerely,
---------------------------------------------
European Dark Age of Camelot Community Manager
i mean wtf can i use this to when its not that im asking for...?

also had another episode of somthing i dont like about GoA, and that happens to be Requiel.

Went out 1 night in rvr. move bridge to kill some enemeys. And out of the night skys i see guards spamming in the middle of the bridge and i dont mean the crappy yellow orange red guards. i mean those that are at Savu faste. i mean why the hell should i go out in rvr get killed for just travel there... iwould had gone mad if it was a player but a GM ?.. what i got told after asking Requiel was "Becours i don't want to see organised duelling going on. It's lame and against the spirit of the game".. i mean wtf i just arrived to the place.. but i just think im gona keep this to another theard sometimes as it has nothing too do with what he ask'd.

actually they were very good with us during the heavy duelling days, they made it clear if we took the piss they would spawn mobs on us but for the most part let us get on with it. i always found it quite funny to see them pop and insta kill everyone


anyway back on topic please people

 

[gervaise]

Requiel posted:

<<Population issues.
Ways to remedy population issues though are a matter for a different thread.>>

I think this is - maybe - recognition that there is a population issue on the English servers. If so then this may be a change from the view expressed last month when Requiel said he had seen no difference in numbers. Maybe this was subscription numbers rather than player numbers - which will only drop when people's subs are not renewed.


And to answer a query by Mambapoa, you will note that Requiel is flying to Italy to promote the game to journalists over there. The other 'answers' are: a new PR firm was hired - a while back now; GoA made an excellent video that impressed folks in the US and had them asking why Mythic couldn't do that; GoA pay a royalty to Mythic which reduces the amount of money they have - bottomline - big 'paid advertsing' just isn't cost effective for a game like DAoC.

And EA's view is that video 'games' have a 4-6 year life span (which includes sequels etc.) so I wouldn't expect a major EA push.

 

[Bracken]

What if we had a voluntary charter call it 'sportsmanlike conduct' or something that people could sign up to?

We tried something similar before with Agramon/zergs/the fg scene when we tried to get some basic agreement on respecting each others playstyles - it was basically flawed because a) Not everyone reads FH and b) not everyone is interested in seeking solutions / acting in a mature way (some people get a kick out of constantly griefing or abusing others). I really think the only solution is one based on game mechanics, such as using dynamic guard spawn for low pop periods or locking relic gates between certain hours.