What would YOU class as grief play?

[Esselinithia]

Red is Dead people are quite common in the US (mostly on roleplay servers), but I have no problems with them, even if I try to play a bit on their servers.

But I think Gaheris is a much friendlier server. Ok, sometimes my favorite spots are camped, but then I can go and get my RPs elsewhere.

btw: The real RP farming is done on Gaheris. But there it is allowed. *points to some random hibs* they do it all the time.

 

[Esselinithia]

Most did respect them - there were very few problems in Agramon. They arnt my rules - stop using that devicive phraseology. The community generally recognised that agramon was a fg area - it was actually a great example of the way community guidelines can work, because it did, for well over a year.

Agramon was designed as an area for group vs group fights, mostly for fgs, but also for possible smaller group. It was its design concept, and Mythic made it clear. It isn't surprising that people respected it. And major and not so frequent events (relic raids, official events, etc.) won't change much.

Also for Agramon: PVE people can't find much fun here. Siege people can't find any good targets here. Soloers would face groups. It isn't good for iRVR. Who else would go to that place?

 

[Cromcruaich]

Agramon was designed as an area for group vs group fights, mostly for fgs, but also for possible smaller group. It was its design concept, and Mythic made it clear. It isn't surprising that people respected it. And major and not so frequent events (relic raids, official events, etc.) won't change much.

Also for Agramon: PVE people can't find much fun here. Siege people can't find any good targets here. Soloers would face groups. It isn't good for iRVR. Who else would go to that place?

I completely baffled as to what point you are trying to make by this.

Agramon was not designed as an area for fg fights. Thats just what happened. And its completely irrelevant anyway. What it does do is provide a perfect demonstration of how seperating the full groups out to an area where there is little interference with how they choose to play, benefits the community by reducing tensions by having a clear area where they can play as they want - there is no arguments, no abusive send by either party. Like I say, i think youve lost whatever point you are trying to make somewhere along the line.

 

[Xmi]

This really is the crux - people who want to add, can add on other adders, they can add at sieges, they can add at bridges they can add as much as they like, however ultimately this playstyle completely obliterates and makes impossible all other balanced play styles unless they operate with a bit of respect for others who dont want to add on anything that moves. And thats the very core of the problem the fair fight crew have.

Just an observation, but it sounds like you would prefer the restricted fighting areas of guild wars more so than the chaotic nature of DAoC; it is that chaotic nature that has made this game so great. You can't just take out what is bad for you and be left with good for all, you will end up with a completely different game. I like the current mix (on Kay anyway), including the so called bad stuff, I don't want to play a sanitised version, thanks.

Finally you say that adding "completely obliterates all other balanced play styles", sounds a bit extreme, I don't think adding is or will ever be that bad a problem.

 

[Thorwyn]

Agramon was designed as an area for group vs group fights, mostly for fgs, but also for possible smaller group. It was its design concept, and Mythic made it clear.

Care to show me or quote the corresponding part in the DAoC deisgn doc? Or anything similarily official to back up this statement?

 

[Esselinithia]

It was made because of the responses from fg scene about NF. Its design offers almost nothing for any groups.

PVE people can't get much out of it, siege people can't get much out of it, not a good place for solo / duo people, etc.

 

[Cromcruaich]

Just an observation, but it sounds like you would prefer the restricted fighting areas of guild wars more so than the chaotic nature of DAoC; it is that chaotic nature that has made this game so great. You can't just take out what is bad for you and be left with good for all, you will end up with a completely different game. I like the current mix (on Kay anyway), including the so called bad stuff, I don't want to play a sanitised version, thanks.

Finally you say that adding "completely obliterates all other balanced play styles", sounds a bit extreme, I don't think adding is or will ever be that bad a problem.

Need to look at my posts as a whole - one aspect of this game I enjoy is 8v8 and to a lesser extent 1v1s (though im not a melee dueler), I also enjoy siege warfare, and even running with the zerg. Things arnt black and white, and I agree, the chaotic nature is part of the game - what i'm trying to get across is that while you dont want to play a sanitised version - thats fine - I agree - people should still have respect for people who enjoy dueling (where the people deserve respect). And im afraid the result of adding is that it does indeed completely obliterate all other balanced play styles - it leaves no room for people who want to play in a different style - and there is nothing whatsoever those soloers can do about it.

Also I think while these discussion have been raging over the last 2 years or more, an element of malice has crept in, exemplified really by Awarkles recent action.

 

[Cromcruaich]

It was made because of the responses from fg scene about NF. Its design offers almost nothing for any groups.

PVE people can't get much out of it, siege people can't get much out of it, not a good place for solo / duo people, etc.

Where the hell does it say that? But as i said thats completely irrelevant. The lesson you should be taking home here is that its a good thing to allow people to play the game in a way they want to and to respect the game choice those people have made, provided it doesnt have any detrimental affect on others. In fact, for a long time I think the gg scene had very positive effects on the server as a whole barring the odd fool.

Oh and what agramon offers is a land crossing and bridge choke points for rvr people of all realms - the idea was that it was a quick way of getting into rvr, with chances of meeting the enemy realms at all points from the bridge head keep to the enemy bridge head keep. It was primarily there to ape old emain, and the OF style of realm gate choke points. The fact that it was utilised by full groups had nothing to do with any official line from Mythic.

 

[Esselinithia]

Cromcruaich: Where some PVE people goes out to get an assassin, you attack that people, and its "balanced" (in effort / reward) fight is ruined by some additional forces appearing. Imho it isn't different from adding.

Many soloers add on each other as well.

Adds happen. And you can't expect people to stop adding on your fights only while you add on fights of others.

If you don't add and support people who doesn't add on your fights, and if someone wrongs you talk with him politely, then if it doesn't help pay back in kind. (of course if he says: the guy you fought killed him while PVEing often, greykilled him in DF repeatedly so he is a Kill on Sight target that isn't some adding you should be angry because. But if he fights a target on your kill on sight list...)

 

[Dard]

It was made because of the responses from fg scene about NF. Its design offers almost nothing for any groups.

PVE people can't get much out of it, siege people can't get much out of it, not a good place for solo / duo people, etc.

Ahh yes, it was made by Mythic for FG rvr, thats why they put the entrance to the labyrinth there

 

[Esselinithia]

Oh and what agramon offers is a land crossing and bridge choke points for rvr people of all realms - the idea was that it was a quick way of getting into rvr, with chances of meeting the enemy realms at all points from the bridge head keep to the enemy bridge head keep. It was primarily there to ape old emain, and the OF style of realm gate choke points. The fact that it was utilised by full groups had nothing to do with any official line from Mythic.

That old emain was dominated by these fgs as well.

And again: the place offered almost nothing for other groups. So there were no source of conflict, only some had reasons to go there, noone else.

If you have no source for conflct you won't see conflict. It doesn't say, if there is some reason for conflict (conflicting interests) it is insta solved based on an irrelevant example.

It would say: If Mythic would increase siege RPs in some zones, and reduce kill RPs in other zones, that would mean, some area would be appealing mostly for siege crews, so most of them would end up there. This separation by design would prevent 30 man with siege engines showing up where you would solo. But it needs design changes from Mythic.

Also if there would be instanced RvR areas for 1v1 and 2v2 that would stop the whole dueling ring issue, but not because people would change their ways or behavior. But because Awarkle would be unable to add in an 1v1 rvr instance.

I think Mythic should drop NF, and make instanced RvR missions for different playing styles. Some longer and some shorter battles, and make sure the servers that handle these instances and work with multiple client languages, and can accept people from all existing servers. Also some hard mode raids (PVE) that gives you RP as an option.

 

[Esselinithia]

Ahh yes, it was made by Mythic for FG rvr, thats why they put the entrance to the labyrinth there

The laby entrance was a bad choice, I think. And a reason why the behavior of people in that zone changed.

it in fact proves the point: Zone design can dictate who ends up where.

 

[Cromcruaich]

Cromcruaich: Where some PVE people goes out to get an assassin, you attack that people, and its "balanced" (in effort / reward) fight is ruined by some additional forces appearing. Imho it isn't different from adding.

Wooow there, another complete fabrication. Look, if someone is doing an assasin mission then more often than not i personally let them finish it. As do a hell of a lot of the more honorable 1v1 and 8v8 groups (when they were around). The red or dead crew absolutely never ever do that! Cant you understand that very very important point? But to be honest, why the hell are you running out getting assasin missions when you could just group up?!

Many soloers add on each other as well.

Gah, then they arent soloers, or they are soloers with grudges. And look, we're not talking about many soloers here, were talking about a general principle that means within the game there is room for people to solo and have uninterupted fights provided they respect their own self imposed code.

Adds happen. And you can't expect people to stop adding on your fights only while you add on fights of others.

Gah number 2. Who the hell adds on the fights of others? This is again a completely irrelevant to the overall discussion. I wish you wouldnt throw this stuff in, its just a distraction from the core idea - a ideal if you wish where as above, there is room to let respected soloers have a fair fight.

If you don't add and support people who doesn't add on your fights, and if someone wrongs you talk with him politely, then if it doesn't help pay back in kind. (of course if he says: the guy you fought killed him while PVEing often, greykilled him in DF repeatedly so he is a Kill on Sight target that isn't some adding you should be angry because. But if he fights a target on your kill on sight list...)

I agree. This is one of the corner stones of the 1v1 scene.


It seems you are for some reason raising some pretty minor points when you do agree in principle with the idea that some soloers should be allowed to have honourable fights, provided they to have been respectful to you in your assasin missions, though again, for the love of god, group up with someone instead

 

[Shike]

No
I say, if you base your argument on the fact that you claim you are never rude.

But you are rude in that post.

That says: you lied and made a flawed argument in the same time. No need to discuss it in detail.

And now you are just beeing anal.. you know what points I made in my posts and you simply cannot answer to them at all, you know this and choose a different approach and blame it on the language. Ingame Im practically never rude no, why would I be? Thats whats important in my book, ingame.

And you seriosly suck at debating shit you know nothing about.. you are basically a zerging nobody who think you are holier than anyone else. You put yourself on high horses and claim you know something while.. you know absolutely nothing since you only see your shitty side of the fence.

And please, for the love of god, shorten your posts and make them more concise. Its very tiresome to try and find your arguements in layers and layers of rosetinted biased bullshit.

 

[Cromcruaich]

The laby entrance was a bad choice, I think. And a reason why the behavior of people in that zone changed.

it in fact proves the point: Zone design can dictate who ends up where.

This does absolutely nothing to support whatever argument you are trying to support.

Let me be clear - my argument is that some self imposed loose community guidelines, such as having an area like agramon can infact be of benefit to the community as a whole, by allowing one portion of the community, the chance to play in a style they choose without significant interuption, and that this also reduces tensions and even mutual abuse in game. What point are you trying to make? Is it contrary to mine as stated?

 

[Cromcruaich]

on an irrelevant example.

Its not an irrelevant example - do you know why? Because it was very much a feature of fg rvr on the English cluster for about a year and a half.

The broader point that I was trying to illustrate, is that there is room for people to respect play styles, and that leaving fg fights, and people who want to play in a specific way is a reasonable thing to do. It harms no one and is actually a benefit to all people. I'm not getting into an argument about the logistics of warfare in agramon as it has nothing to do with the overall point im trying to make, and which even though I think you have some sympathy with, you are doing your damndest to ignore by throwing up mostly irrelevant diversionary points.

 

[Dard]

That old emain was dominated by these fgs as well.

And again: the place offered almost nothing for other groups. So there were no source of conflict, only some had reasons to go there, noone else.

If you have no source for conflct you won't see conflict. It doesn't say, if there is some reason for conflict (conflicting interests) it is insta solved based on an irrelevant example.

It would say: If Mythic would increase siege RPs in some zones, and reduce kill RPs in other zones, that would mean, some area would be appealing mostly for siege crews, so most of them would end up there. This separation by design would prevent 30 man with siege engines showing up where you would solo. But it needs design changes from Mythic.

Also if there would be instanced RvR areas for 1v1 and 2v2 that would stop the whole dueling ring issue, but not because people would change their ways or behavior. But because Awarkle would be unable to add in an 1v1 rvr instance.

I think Mythic should drop NF, and make instanced RvR missions for different playing styles. Some longer and some shorter battles, and make sure the servers that handle these instances and work with multiple client languages, and can accept people from all existing servers. Also some hard mode raids (PVE) that gives you RP as an option.

Did you play in OF ?

Old emain in particular was dominated by everybody who went to RvR because it had fewer aggro mobs & didnt make you go blind (Hello Odins!). Everyone went there unless there was some siege/relic shizzle going on in Alb or Mid. Old Emain was THE RvR arena for most people.

Oh, & instanced rvr would be a bit rubbish imo, ive had lots of pleasure watching the like's of Maelstrom fight PE, i enjoy watching solo fights & other fairly even & some fairly uneven fights. It helps you to get to know the game & to get to know your opponents.

 

[Xmi]

people should still have respect for people who enjoy dueling (where the people deserve respect).

But why should they if its not within their play style to watch and respect others; and respect is a very personal thing, for some it is to sit and watch and for others it is to add and kill because they are a dangerous foe, and for others, why should they show respect to an opposing side's player, i.e. kill at all cost!

At the end of the day whether you choose to add or not, or whether you like adders or not, is down to your play style, but that play style still sits within the context of open RvR, where the rug can get pulled at any moment, you may not like that fact, but it's a fact nonetheless.

I think we have done this to death, and while we have a lot of common ground, I can't see either of us budging on the basics, perhaps we should beg to differ on this occasion.

 

[Dard]

But why should they if its not within their play style to watch and respect others; and respect is a very personal thing, for some it is to sit and watch and for others it is to add and kill because they are a dangerous foe, and for others, why should they show respect to an opposing side's player, i.e. kill at all cost!

At the end of the day whether you choose to add or not, or whether you like adders or not, is down to your play style, but that play style still sits within the context of open RvR, where the rug can get pulled at any moment, you may not like that fact, but it's a fact nonetheless.

I think we have done this to death, and while we have a lot of common ground, I can't see either of us budging on the basics, perhaps we should beg to differ on this occasion.

I understand what you are saying but do you not think its a rather shit & sad attitude

 

[Cromcruaich]

But why should they if its not within their play style to watch and respect others; and respect is a very personal thing, for some it is to sit and watch and for others it is to add and kill because they are a dangerous foe, and for others, why should they show respect to an opposing side's player, i.e. kill at all cost!

At the end of the day whether you choose to add or not, or whether you like adders or not, is down to your play style, but that play style still sits within the context of open RvR, where the rug can get pulled at any moment, you may not like that fact, but it's a fact nonetheless.

I think we have done this to death, and while we have a lot of common ground, I can't see either of us budging on the basics, perhaps we should beg to differ on this occasion.

They should do because it goes beyond 2 characters playing in a game - its having a bit of respect for the person behind that character at the other end of the PC. All i'm arguing for is that in some circumstances people should find a bit of room in there hearts to let 2 other people get 2 minutes of enjoyment from the game in a way they choose. And for people not to always but always automatically ruin those peoples gaming experience. Thats all - im not saying in all circumstances, for all people all the time. Its just to look at yourself and think for 2 seconds before you add - will I let these 2 old timers finish this 2 minute fight with honour - or am I going to piss all over there fun and cause them an immense amount of frustration and roll them both now.

Thats all, and you know what, because those two players probably dont just solo, if you force them to quit the game for just basically enforcing your playstyle on them without thought - then you are cutting your own throat - because they wont be logging on next time on their rog lord caster, or with their support character.

If i was to sum it up, and at the risk of repeating myself - lets all cut each other a bit of slack now and again.

Oh and look at Gahns sig, he's quit over the specific issue of GoA and dueling - now you might not agree or even like Gahn, but he was a good an honourable player who has helped a lot of people in the past on prib, and its a shame to lose characters like that through what was basically some baby throwing his toys out of the pram.

 

[Esselinithia]

Shike: Your whole argument was based on your don't hurt others you aren't rude with others and you should be respected.

If you are rude, you are rude with others you hurt others and their feelings and you shouldn't be respected but you should expect payback teams ruining your game all the time.

Got the point?
If you are a rude ass and agressive moron, you shouldn't base your argument based on how nice you are, since you come to wrong conclusions.

And if you know where I play, how I play it is written down many places, you shouldn't assume otherwise to throw your stupid insults since that just proves one point: you are a stupid arrogant moron, who make enemies and whine when these enemies add on your fight.

Got it?

When you doesn't base your argument on you never making insults and making quite a few in same sentence (so proving yourself wrong instantly) maybe I will listen to you more. till that: Have good time with all the adds

 

[Esselinithia]

Its not an irrelevant example - do you know why? Because it was very much a feature of fg rvr on the English cluster for about a year and a half.

It is irrevelant, since the peace here was based on lack of conflicting interests. So it isn't an example of how you can handle conflicting interests, since it doesn't speak about how people handled conflicting needs, ideas and interests.

 

[Shike]

Shike: Your whole argument was based on your don't hurt others you aren't rude with others and you should be respected.

If you are rude, you are rude with others you hurt others and their feelings and you shouldn't be respected but you should expect payback teams ruining your game all the time.

Got the point?
If you are a rude ass and agressive moron, you shouldn't base your argument based on how nice you are, since you come to wrong conclusions.

And if you know where I play, how I play it is written down many places, you shouldn't assume otherwise to throw your stupid insults since that just proves one point: you are a stupid arrogant moron, who make enemies and whine when these enemies add on your fight.

Got it?

When you doesn't base your argument on you never making insults and making quite a few in same sentence (so proving yourself wrong instantly) maybe I will listen to you more. till that: Have good time with all the adds

rofl

nope, you didnt get it

 

[Dard]

It is irrevelant, since the peace here was based on lack of conflicting interests. So it isn't an example of how you can handle conflicting interests, since it doesn't speak about how people handled conflicting needs, ideas and interests.

I appreciate your not English but your not making any sense now, your arguments are ill informed, biased, narrow minded & selfish.

 

[Cromcruaich]

It is irrevelant, since the peace here was based on lack of conflicting interests. So it isn't an example of how you can handle conflicting interests, since it doesn't speak about how people handled conflicting needs, ideas and interests.

No no no, im afraid it is again absolutely irrelevant how or why agramon arose as the fg area. The point to take home is that it suceeded and was useful in seperating those fg players from those who werent part of that scene.

But again do you think the in game seperation was useful or not useful? Was it a positive thing for people (on balance) to have that seperation (accidental or otherwise) or not?

 

[Conway]

Most did respect them - there were very few problems in Agramon. They arnt my rules - stop using that devicive phraseology. The community generally recognised that agramon was a fg area - it was actually a great example of the way community guidelines can work, because it did, for well over a year. . It was something that was generally recognised by everyone, that on the whole benefitted the server by not throwing together people on opposing sides of the fair fight argument.

Yes... The problem from where I saw it was the community accepted the convention that Agramon was for 8v8. No adding. They were given respect. You say that yourself. Some groups however wanted 8v8 rules to apply everywhere including in the middle of irvr when the zerg was around and you were close enough to throw an elephant at Dun Crauchon. So there were occasions when you got a group busily hitting their don't add macros, of very variable politeness, in a very confused area full of people. On the whole, it would have helped if having been given their recognised fg area, they in return accepted an area which was zerg friendly. They could still go there of course, but there was no need for the don't add comments.

 

[Conway]

But again do you think the in game seperation was useful or not useful? Was it a positive thing for people (on balance) to have that seperation (accidental or otherwise) or not?

Yes, in my opinion the separation was positive. The problem was when the full groups decided there was not enough action on Agramon, they came to farm the zerg and still wanted their no adding rule. Respect should be mutual.

 

[Esselinithia]

Cromcruaich: Lets make it very simple and clear.
Is BMW successful?
Yes. Then we should play along the rules BMW uses to make cars?
No.

Why? Because different goals, different markets and different conditions call for different approach. A single success story isn't an example you can follow everytime and everywhere.

Some area separated people based on what it could offer, it is succesful, because: It doesn't limit anyone.

Noone had to give up much to leave that area as fg place. Noone was forced to give up something. They simply had no interest.

Now, if we say, people who see no interest in going to any given keep can stay away from it, would that stop the add problem?

No, since the adds have reasons to go to your areas and kill farmers. So following the example of that zone and go where you have some interesting targets won't fix this problem.

Since people have reasons to go to you, have reasons to add. So the "if you don't see any reason to come here, we have this place" approach can't work and won't work.

But the "if you respect me, I should respect you" way is important:
if I am nice, and you are nice I should respect you for that reason alone.
If I am not nice but you are, I should respect you because losing your respect would mean you will hurt my game.
If I am nice and you aren't nice, I should help people who have problems with you, even if it hurts. (And they side with me, when I have problems with rude people) Since it is better for both.
If neither of us is nice, nothing can be done anyway.

This guideline works, and doesn't divide the land. As a PVE fan, I can ignore your soloing, and be happy that you don't hurt me when I face an assassin (you might even help!), and as a soloer you can be happy since I won't add on your fight. This works.

Dividing the land by our choice won't work. Since I will get missions to zones where you solo. When I am at sieges, you might want to duel at that keep, etc.

Dividing the land can only be done on mythic side, since they can make sure soloers and PVE people won't face each other, by moving missions and good solo places into different areas (or instances).

Instanced PVP systems (WoW BGs, WoW Arena system) can be a better example.

 

[Esselinithia]

Oh and look at Gahns sig, he's quit over the specific issue of GoA and dueling - now you might not agree or even like Gahn, but he was a good an honourable player who has helped a lot of people in the past on prib, and its a shame to lose characters like that through what was basically some baby throwing his toys out of the pram.

I am happy to see him go. From his behavior here I can't see him as good or honorable person. Not only in game, but as the person behind the screen.

The moment where he will stop whishing ill for everyone, and will try the "live and let live" approach, and cares to use some definitions to be able to discuss problems and talk intelligently and willing to solve problems and look for a compromise, my oppinion can change, but so far I am very happy to see less such troublemakers in the game.

 

[Shike]

Gahn is actually a damn nice player ingame, fair and he solos and respect people, he have also tried with running groups for rvrs for quite some time and not only for his own sake. He have also ran a solozone for some time to try and improve things for the few solos out there and hes in general a damn nice chap.

what have you done that makes you worthy of condemning someone who actually has a good standing in the community? why are you so much better than some others?

those are important questions which you really should find good answers for before you keep yapping like you do now. atm you come across as a really really nasty person when you wish people off the server etc.. Not even I do such things and I can be quite horrible on FH sometimes.