(long post) :( GOA response to the petition in support of TT and Black Falcon members

[Cromcruaich]

I was acutely aware that I did not want to become GOA's mouthpiece. That is why I demonstrated that I clearly objected to their interpretation of the SoTG.

Aye, I know Shark, I should of qualified that a bit more. Youve done an absolutely stirling job. No criticism intended.Ive nothing but praise for what you did.

 

[Sharkith]

I'm not sure I agree with you there. If the keep had been released, there wouldn't have been an issue, as any other guild could have taken it up. Look how quickly Hib was reclaimed after guilds released keeps there. It was setting it to 1, and not releasing it that was the issue. Had it been simply released, and most guilds refused to claim it, on the grounds that they considered the relic unfairly taken, I'm not sure there would be the same issue.

Releasing it says "TT (in that case) don't want to support an 'unfairly taken' relic, and if others do, they can support it themselves". Setting it to one says "TT (in that case) don't want to support and 'unfairly taken' relic and don't care what others think".

Whilst I don't think GOA was right in the ban, I don't think that releasing it would have resulted in a ban.

The main challenge of a 'round table meeting' to discuss stuff is that of who 8 people who represent the realm would be. I know that there are different circles of people within the game, I'd not ever heard of some of the guilds in Albion who have been involved in these threads, despite running ML raids, and having been around long enough to ding Elder.

Darzil

Darzil,

I understand all of your points I even understand GOA's take on it - at least better than I did. The alternative I have is simple.

TT declare that "as a realm we would like you all to stop behaving like the rabble you are and to learn something about the code of war 'what?'"

"As the obvious leaders of this rabble 'what?' we expect you to stop behaving like imbeciles 'what?' and to jolly well take the relic when we can have a good fight 'what?' In response to your underhanded tactics we are going to give the old Hiblets a sporting chance 'what?' by lowering the keep to level 1 and kicking the living crap out of them when they come for the relic 'what?' Lets show these blighters that we still have some mettle 'what?'

Now of course TT did not do that and the case is different to the scenario described. Don't use the difference as an excuse to side step the issue.

Instead what did we get? All we got was x numbers of pages of vitrol and whine about how it was against the SToG. In my questions to GOA I asked about codes of honour and they said it would put an emphasis on playing the forums rather than the game. I can see their point. I disagree that this would be such a bad thing. It might even encourage more to come and talk.

The scenario I described above cannot happen now because it would clearly be against the SoTG. Because GOA 'Cannot think of any scenario where it would not be'.

Now do you get my drift? Can you see how limiting their interpretation is yet?


ZOMG I AM ROLEPLAYING IN A ROLEPLAYING GAME AND IT IS AGAINST THE RULES OF ROLEPLAYING!!

 

[Cromcruaich]

This one is going to be beaten around for a while I think, but heres what I think, take it or leave it.

The "spirit of the game" should be decided by the people of the realms, a democracy if you will. In the realms of "Role playing", which this game is, I would have liked GOA to make an official announcement around the realm concerned ie Albion, that at XX o'clock, an official hearing would be declared by the King for the crime of Treason to the Realm, and he calls upon eight people of good standing (GMs) to make their way to Camelot.

The eight would be invited into a private session with the kings chamberlain (played by a GOA rep), who would present the evidence. Also in the room should be the accused, silent.

Afterthe charges are read, the eight could discuss the options, banning, public hanging (more roleplay!) or set free without charge.

The outcome would then be made public, for all to see before it happens.

I dont think this would take much effort tbh, and would mean RP, customer involvement and the main thing the decision being made by the players.

Just an idea, but I think matters concerning the realms should be handled by its people, and have a little fun to boot.

Comments?

Ahh, a bit of lateral thought and one in keeping with SotG. Repped.

 

[Aerendur]

Well done shark. However there is still the point that they acknowledge that AC raids grieve other players, giving them a legitimate reason to prevent them from occurring.

For example by placing the impossible to kill 'after patch / reset' mobs in the relic keeps at a time off low population (whether you do this on a set number of defenders online or on a set time could be debated).

I still think they should do that. Their reply justifies this request.

 

[Gahn]

What surely i know right now is that when i jump ship to War, i highly doubt i will play Eu under Goa management.

 

[Fatload BoysDoCry]

Would be nice if each of the realms dragons went to defend a relic if a relic gate was opened after a certain time ie 2am.

 

[GrivneKelmorian]

This one is going to be beaten around for a while I think, but heres what I think, take it or leave it.

The "spirit of the game" should be decided by the people of the realms, a democracy if you will. In the realms of "Role playing", which this game is, I would have liked GOA to make an official announcement around the realm concerned ie Albion, that at XX o'clock, an official hearing would be declared by the King for the crime of Treason to the Realm, and he calls upon eight people of good standing (GMs) to make their way to Camelot.

The eight would be invited into a private session with the kings chamberlain (played by a GOA rep), who would present the evidence. Also in the room should be the accused, silent.

Afterthe charges are read, the eight could discuss the options, banning, public hanging (more roleplay!) or set free without charge.

The outcome would then be made public, for all to see before it happens.

I dont think this would take much effort tbh, and would mean RP, customer involvement and the main thing the decision being made by the players.

Just an idea, but I think matters concerning the realms should be handled by its people, and have a little fun to boot.

Comments?

congratulations, what can be more in the spirit of the game then this, imo! good job

 

[Conway]

I think the only possible mechanism for consulting the opinion of players is to have a poll of those actually logging in to a server. People may or may not read a forum, or care to post on it, and its been fairly obvious that people don't exactly agree on most things on this forum. Selecting a sub group of players to decide for everyone is a minefield. One account, one vote, and if you aren't actually playing a server then you aren't involved, seems to be the only way. There is no practical way of eliminating duplicate votes from people with multiple accounts.

A poll would only be possible for major issues. Generally decisions have to be made by game staff who are hopefully more objective. Letting players ban each other would be an interesting route, but I can guess not many people would be left at the end of it.

 

[Conway]

Would be nice if each of the realms dragons went to defend a relic if a relic gate was opened after a certain time ie 2am.

I like that idea.

 

[Darzil]

Now do you get my drift? Can you see how limiting their interpretation is yet?


ZOMG I AM ROLEPLAYING IN A ROLEPLAYING GAME AND IT IS AGAINST THE RULES OF ROLEPLAYING!!

I can see that it is limiting. There are lots of things in the game which are limiting. We play the game within limits. This limit, however, like Bainshee's not coning through bridge walls, is a limit set by GOA's interpretation of fair play, rather than by game coding, so it is more contentious.

My opinion is that there shouldn't have been bans for this, just a warning and slap on the wrist, and a statement that there would be bans if they didn't either release the keep or up it again, with the reasoning explained.

I don't, however, find it terribly limiting. We seem to have hit a limit which relates to not dropping the level of a keep holding a relic deliberately to encourage an enemy to take it. We've hit this, apparently, once since NF came out. That's an awful lot of player hours of play without hitting it.

My opinion is this was handled in a poor, and divisive, way by GOA, by which I mean a ban, rather than a news statement of their position.

It is also my opinion that this was handled in a poor, and divisive, way by the FH RvR community. By that I mean all the mudslinging and name-calling, not your reasonable attempt at handling it, and the way some people actively tried to make RvR in the game less fun for others to make a point.

The combination of the two have led to far more people leaving than the AC raids themselves.

I personally believe relics are too static, if there was constant flow and fighting over them then AC raids would be irrelevant. It's because siege rvr has become marginalised that they become more noticable.

Darzil

 

[Horner]

What is the " antisocial element " ? (Please translate in French)

Can u buy it at your local store ?

Did the IRC community get owned by GOA ? :worthy:

OMFG LOL

PS : When is the next AC raid scheduled ? thx in advance.

 

[tierk]

I would have liked GOA to make an official announcement around the realm concerned ie Albion, that at XX o'clock, an official hearing would be declared by the King for the crime of Treason to the Realm, and he calls upon eight people of good standing (GMs) to make their way to Camelot.

The eight would be invited into a private session with the kings chamberlain (played by a GOA rep), who would present the evidence. Also in the room should be the accused, silent.

Afterthe charges are read, the eight could discuss the options, banning, public hanging (more roleplay!) or set free without charge.

The outcome would then be made public, for all to see before it happens.

I dont think this would take much effort tbh, and would mean RP, customer involvement and the main thing the decision being made by the players.

Just an idea, but I think matters concerning the realms should be handled by its people, and have a little fun to boot.

Comments?

Oh if only the people at GOA had enough imagination to think up something like this we would have stamped this problme out a looong time ago.
repped also or trying to rep

 

[Drungan]

Its piss easy to see who is AC raiding all the time and who isnt.

. . .

I'll 2nd that.

Let them taste their own medecine. From what i've read in GOA's statements, it should be perfectly fine to track down ACers by available ingame mechanics.
IF it's the same people over and over who are ACing, report them with the obtained proof, mention your conspiracy theory about them playing against the SotG and ask GOA to investigate them.
If GOA can verify this, they should get banned.

Just need someone to be up at those hours (lateshifters ^^)

 

[Dard]

Would be nice if each of the realms dragons went to defend a relic if a relic gate was opened after a certain time ie 2am.

Then they would say they where doing it becuase they needed respec stones

 

[Fatload BoysDoCry]

Then they would say they where doing it becuase they needed respec stones

Possibly, but it would act as a deterrent to a certain degree.

 

[Gahn]

Possibly, but it would act as a deterrent to a certain degree.

lol @ u taking him seriously -.- It was obviously a bait for the Pve Relics thing

 

[Fatload BoysDoCry]

lol @ u taking him seriously -.- It was obviously a bait for the Pve Relics thing

I guess me not putting a smiley or wink at the end of my sentence confused some people, i shall not make the same mistake again

 

[Dard]

I guess me not putting a smiley or wink at the end of my sentence confused some people, i shall not make the same mistake again

I put a winky at the end ... ill just stop posting :england:

 

[Cromcruaich]

I put a winky at the end ... ill just stop posting :england:

Youve been warned about showing you're winky in public.

 

[Kagato]

Would be nice if each of the realms dragons went to defend a relic if a relic gate was opened after a certain time ie 2am.

That wouldn't make sense though roleplay wise, the Dragons have no interest in their realm and no allegiance to it, and why would they defend something thats just going to make it much easier for that realm to kill them for respec stones?

I can see what your getting at but theres better ways to do this that would make more sense, simply increasing the number of guards and their levels in response to the number of people online in that realm would be a start.

Also I think they should bring back the old frontier system of 'uber guards' that relic keeps had in accordance with keeps owned but with a few changes.

In OF every keep spawned a series of very high level guards inside the relic keep that made raids with low numbers a nightmare. And their level increased with the level of the keep they belonged too.

Now we can adapt this to NF quite easily with towers, for example by saying each of the 4 towers belonging to a keep would spawn a 'uber guard' inside the keep who would gain extra levels 1-10 on top of his already high level in accordance with the level of the tower that spawned him, just like in OF.

This means if you try and ninja a keep or take it whilst ignoring all the towers, a trick favoured with non-portal keeps, your going to be facing a number of these very powerful guards as well.

Non tactical wise this adds several interesting elements, first of all, its better to take all towers first, but that also gives players far more time to prepare for a last defense at the keep, adding strategic advantages to both.

But more interesting in my eyes is that it also means theres a valid strategic point in soloers/small groups running on the outside of a siege trying to take towers back to bring back the powerful guards so they can help defend even if they cannot get inside the keep.

 

[Nate]

why would they defend something thats just going to make it much easier for that realm to kill them for respec stones?

Well hehe ;p if the dragon was to only defend his realms relics it wouldn't make a difference anyway, he'd just be helping his mate in the other realm from getting much more easily killed.

 

[Fatload BoysDoCry]

That wouldn't make sense though roleplay wise, the Dragons have no interest in their realm and no allegiance to it, and why would they defend something thats just going to make it much easier for that realm to kill them for respec stones?

I can see what your getting at but theres better ways to do this that would make more sense, simply increasing the number of guards and their levels in response to the number of people online in that realm would be a start.

Also I think they should bring back the old frontier system of 'uber guards' that relic keeps had in accordance with keeps owned but with a few changes.

In OF every keep spawned a series of very high level guards inside the relic keep that made raids with low numbers a nightmare. And their level increased with the level of the keep they belonged too.

Now we can adapt this to NF quite easily with towers, for example by saying each of the 4 towers belonging to a keep would spawn a 'uber guard' inside the keep who would gain extra levels 1-10 on top of his already high level in accordance with the level of the tower that spawned him, just like in OF.

This means if you try and ninja a keep or take it whilst ignoring all the towers, a trick favoured with non-portal keeps, your going to be facing a number of these very powerful guards as well.

Non tactical wise this adds several interesting elements, first of all, its better to take all towers first, but that also gives players far more time to prepare for a last defense at the keep, adding strategic advantages to both.

But more interesting in my eyes is that it also means theres a valid strategic point in soloers/small groups running on the outside of a siege trying to take towers back to bring back the powerful guards so they can help defend even if they cannot get inside the keep.

I agree completely with what your saying, my comment regarding dragons was just a spur of the moment suggestion which would be easy for GOA to code (and we all know how GOA are all about the quick easy fixes). I think the entire relic taking process needs to be reviewed but with Warhammer due out next year i cannot see that happening in any sort of way.

 

[Mastade]

That wouldn't make sense though roleplay wise, the Dragons have no interest in their realm and no allegiance to it, and why would they defend something thats just going to make it much easier for that realm to kill them for respec stones?

I can see what your getting at but theres better ways to do this that would make more sense, simply increasing the number of guards and their levels in response to the number of people online in that realm would be a start.

Also I think they should bring back the old frontier system of 'uber guards' that relic keeps had in accordance with keeps owned but with a few changes.

In OF every keep spawned a series of very high level guards inside the relic keep that made raids with low numbers a nightmare. And their level increased with the level of the keep they belonged too.

Now we can adapt this to NF quite easily with towers, for example by saying each of the 4 towers belonging to a keep would spawn a 'uber guard' inside the keep who would gain extra levels 1-10 on top of his already high level in accordance with the level of the tower that spawned him, just like in OF.

This means if you try and ninja a keep or take it whilst ignoring all the towers, a trick favoured with non-portal keeps, your going to be facing a number of these very powerful guards as well.

Non tactical wise this adds several interesting elements, first of all, its better to take all towers first, but that also gives players far more time to prepare for a last defense at the keep, adding strategic advantages to both.

But more interesting in my eyes is that it also means theres a valid strategic point in soloers/small groups running on the outside of a siege trying to take towers back to bring back the powerful guards so they can help defend even if they cannot get inside the keep.

I like this idea actually. There is alot that could be improved in NF to make it more interesting. I am one of those that, when i think about the time of arthur and all that, thinks about the big battles of armies clashing into eachother and all chaos breaks loose. I remember the few moments where my BG has clashed into another zerg in open field, be it when our zerg of 100 caught up to gingys defence bg on their move to beno T4, as seen in the movie i made about my MREs, or when we almost caught the mid relic carriers and their zerg(fucking maditions grp ninjaed it away ) - That has always been the funniest moments in my MREs.

Too bad NF is nowhere near supporting big zergs fighting eachother in the open, it has always been about knocking down a gate or crush a wall, with X number of attackers against X number of defenders.

 

[Fatload BoysDoCry]

Oh and remove boats also, make everyone go through Agramon if they want to goto the enemy realms.

 

[GrivneKelmorian]

Oh and remove boats also, make everyone go through Agramon if they want to goto the enemy realms.

thats actually a good idea.

 

[Tallen]

Oh and remove boats also, make everyone go through Agramon if they want to goto the enemy realms.

So if your realm doesn't have control of it's main portal keep, you'd like to run from Scath/Ailinne to Agramon? Sounds a lot like the old hike to emain in OF.

Back in OF this was a problem, the ports/boats stop this scenario....it also removes the possibility of groups sat camping the popular routes ganking everything that runs past, solo or otherwise.

The point of NF is you can get to the fun rvr areas without having to be either a stealther or in a FG to get there in one piece.

Sorry, but this idea is <expletive>.

 

[Nate]

I think removing Autoboats in NF would be a better idea, player controlled boats are quite a nice idea and they aren't that quick as opposed to the auto ones.

 

[Fatload BoysDoCry]

So if your realm doesn't have control of it's main portal keep, you'd like to run from Scath/Ailinne to Agramon? Sounds a lot like the old hike to emain in OF.

Back in OF this was a problem, the ports/boats stop this scenario....it also removes the possibility of groups sat camping the popular routes ganking everything that runs past, solo or otherwise.

The point of NF is you can get to the fun rvr areas without having to be either a stealther or in a FG to get there in one piece.

Sorry, but this idea is <expletive>.

If you want port go take it back, removing boats from NF would make people go through Agramon and centralize rvr more instead of it being spread all over. When the populations in general and this cluster in particular are declining having more people in the same area would increase the fun for many while dragging zergs away from area's tended to be favored by 'solo' players. This is one of the things that made OF so appealing, the concentrated population in one zone.

 

[Craft]

its always going to be a problem getting players to actually meet other players, stealthers can choose to a certain extent who they fight, 'visables' however cannot

 

[Bondoila]

Secondly we don't know what happens if you release the keep. This is in my opinion the most important thing. Releasing the keep makes it drop down to level 1. Making it very easy to take for a while. What happens if TT had released the keep when it was under attack? Obviously some would say clearly grief play but what happens if they release it an hour before an advertised MRE on a public forum? It would be nice to know though. Are we forced to support the actions of all our realm mates or can we make decisions to not help them?

Answer is clear - not against the SoTG because you are 'at the very least not hindering' your realm mates.

How could someone get banned for this then ? (refering to the BF player who did release the keep, and TT did claim it after)
No real profe or evidence fo this, the only ingame action that was take was simply to release the keep and that did still result in a ban.

I still think they took this action because alot of randoms cried.