What would YOU class as grief play?

[Cromcruaich]

The "code of honour" of no adding means people won't help those who actually WANT help. Whether the bystander share your views, or because they are afraid that the guy they help will yell at them for adding, the result is the same - casual players have 0% chance. Maybe they (we) don't belong in DaoC... I don't know.

Thats an extremely narrow slice of the game. You are completely free to get involved with whatever other rvr is going on, you could even have a go at a duel yourself. That 1v1 person would certainly jump in (on the whole) if you were getting ganked down by more than one enemy - its only in very narrow and specific solo 1v1 arena that they would choose to ignore the fight, if you are fighting against a respected adversary. You still have an absolute myriad of options available. Whereas the reverse situation a soloer who just wants to test his skill against like minded people in fair numbered fights has (admittedly self imposed) restrictions on their play options. And I think that is fair enough - if they dont want to go hump a tower, then why should we say tuff, i'm afraid its red or dead here sonny, if you dont like it, piss off.

 

[Esselinithia]

Lets make it more clear then:

1st: Red is dead is more likely to attack, but he isn't angry when I go back with friends...

2nd: If people add on your fight, that doesn't stop you from soloing. You don't have to add, and in many cases you won't get adds.
3rd: Saying they shouldn't add (if it would work) would stop them from adding

This is why the "don't add" arguments are problematic. Since if you get constant adds: You can't enjoy the game. But if they can't add they lose their fun with their playing style.

Either this or that.

If you say: Around DC is solo area: You say people who like to add or like to get help while in fight, and accept to fight against addstoo aren't welcome. It would limit their choices.

If you find a way to tell: what would you like to do, and every group (including soloers, red is dead, 8v8 people, etc) can decide to how to react to this based on respect, you have a better chance of cooperation.

Why? because you can tell "don't add please" before they would add and without sending them any messages, and they would consider your wishes. Most won't add but some might add.

But you won't attack a PVEer, or help the PVE people when he gets attacked.

This is why communication and ways to coexists is working in areas where there is no natuaral separation.

And you can't enforce separation.

 

[Esselinithia]

Thats an extremely narrow slice of the game. You are completely free to get involved with whatever other rvr is going on, you could even have a go at a duel yourself.

Here is a problem.

Say, you want to do missions.
It sends you to Boldiam Tower 1.

What can you do?
Go to Boldiam Tower 1.

Soloer is here, sees a lone cleric. Since, like you, he assumes it is solo land since it isn't irvr and isn't fg land, the cleric is now a fair target.

The cleric won't have a chance. not rvr specced, won't win any single duel, and now his mission is botched.

The next mission sends to iRVR, so another /rel

Next time another tower: Another soloer here, and the exact same thing happens.

Next time another tower: The red is dead crew is here... another /rel

As you see the cleric in this example won't finish any missions, won't get RAs, and will avoid RvR land in prime time.

You say: But the cleric can duel.

A full rejuv cleric can't, since has no chance. So the "you can join or fuck of" attitude means: You would force your own ideas on the person even to the point where one should respecc and change the habbits even outside of RvR.

The cleric won't like it, so probably will have two chances:

1st: come back with a group and make sure it is the soloer who has to /rel this time. You will get steamrolled, added on your fight, etc.
2nd: don't go to frontier except in off hours, so you forced a hard decision on this cleric.

If later you demand sympathy from a cleric who had either the 1st choice and got yelled at, or the 2nd choice and can't get the RAs you won't get the sympathy.

And no other soloer with same reasoning and attitude will. Not even Gahn.

In both cases you will die.

Most soloers won't skip a lone target because it is PVEing, only a very few will.
And most red is dead crew won't skip a lone target either if it is PVEing, but a very few will. And most of the red is dead crew will be happy to protect the same cleric against members of other realms (happy to steamroll soloers who killed the poor cleric) and they won't make abusive comments when the cleric tries to go back under protection of some friends.

Even if the soloers are sligthly less likely to attack the cleric (they might be in other fights, they might recognize the soloer in time) the help from red is dead crew at other times, the difference in abusive comments will probably make sure: the cleric will side with the red is dead crew.

At least you know who your friends are, and when to run, and ask for help.

Again: Some people from "red is dead crew" who respect others and happy to skip a few fights since others should have some fun, even if they like to fight between armies and attack most enemies they see...

They will see it is easier to cooperate with the PVE people than with the soloer.

So they might skip the odd cleric on mission (or even help the cleric)

And will happily add on the fight of the soloers.

Again: I play with my cleric, I see some hib coming at me while trying to do my mission. I will try to ask friends for help, you will see: you would won against a cleric who tries hard to survive, but 2 scouts add. And you get some /rude-s as well.

I see: you tried to attack me on my mission, but two friends I met while repaing towers helped when I asked.

Who should I side with? The two scouts of course.

If you start flaming against them, post fao threads, they will know: You haven't respected their friends, but you want things your way all the time... So they won't have much reason to respect you. You will get adds and reports.

Why? Because you, in all of this time, failed to understand. PVE people doesn't choose where they get missions. And if you claim all non iRVR non fg areas as solo area that is worse.

If you move solo area away from keeps, towers, and routes to assassin mission: Less conflict will happen.

if you use the dress code: You will know the PVEer, you won't attack the lone cleric, the cleric won't call two scouts, won't be some thread of whine and abusive comments, you won't have two angry scouts adding on your and reporting you many times.

And I say again: A PVEer won't attack you (why? Because a such carebear favors PVE and PVE only because he / she hates to attack other players in any way.) if you don't force him/her to do it and bring adds. So if you leave the PVE people alone they will leave you alone.

Since siege is the only thing I accept in RvR, I know if you pose no threat to our siege, I don't care what you do in the forest nearby.

If you attack the lone guy behind the tower (the one with a treb) that means: you are happy to fight against siege crew, and the same people will attack you (and it might mean adds).

 

[Cromcruaich]

Thanks, that is clearer.

Lets make it more clear then:

1st: Red is dead is more likely to attack, but he isn't angry when I go back with friends...

You go back with friends to kill the soloer who beat you in a fair fight?!?

2nd: If people add on your fight, that doesn't stop you from soloing. You don't have to add, and in many cases you won't get adds.

Ofcourse it does - especially if you 'go back with friends'. You do see how a soloers choosen play style is destroyed by red is dead mentality. Thing is, this is a rhetorical question, because I know you do from some of your previous answers where you do allow within your framework of play room to respect other peoples fights.

But if they can't add they lose their fun with their playing style.

This is fundamentally wrong. Soloing doesnt exclude other non soloers from killing whoever else they wish, engaging in whatever warfare they want to - hell most soloers dont even mind (so much) getting rolled after their fight is finished. Again this is a crucial point ive being trying to drive home.

If you say: Around DC is solo area: You say people who like to add or like to get help while in fight, and accept to fight against addstoo aren't welcome. It would limit their choices.

This doesnt reflect the reality of the server, and no one has ever said lets make DC a solo area. I say below an easy way to distinguish a soloer. Its a little rough I know, but I think its a good starting point. Also, people are always free to use their commonsense and experience.

If you find a way to tell: what would you like to do, and every group (including soloers, red is dead, 8v8 people, etc) can decide to how to react to this based on respect, you have a better chance of cooperation.

Why? because you can tell "don't add please" before they would add and without sending them any messages, and they would consider your wishes. Most won't add but some might add.

But you won't attack a PVEer, or help the PVE people when he gets attacked.

This is why communication and ways to coexists is working in areas where there is no natuaral separation.

And you can't enforce separation.

A little difficult to read, but if I interpret it correctly, it looks like you think a way of identifying people who wish to solo, or 8v8 etc is a good idea - well surely that means that overall you do agree with the fundamental concept that people should be able to at times engage in play that falls outside of the red or dead style?

Admittedly, I dont think at a practical level its a reasonable solution to use colour coding (hell im colour blind!) - it certainly isnt anywhere near as workable as geographic seperation. But i'll let that go simply because its not my core concern here - my core concern is trying to make people accept that there needs to be scope within peoples playstyle to coexist with others whos playstyle is different from their own - specifically they should tolerate those people who want fair numbered fights, at least for the duration of that fight as a minimum.

Oh note that there is a very easy way to tell if someone is soloing - if they are fighting someone solo, then as a rough guide, lets assume they are soloing. Unless its Tip ofc. Its radical ideas like this that could progress this for us all.

 

[Cromcruaich]

Here is a problem.

Say, you want to do missions.
It sends you to Boldiam Tower 1.

What can you do?
Go to Boldiam Tower 1.

Soloer is here, sees a lone cleric. Since, like you, he assumes it is solo land since it isn't irvr and isn't fg land, the cleric is now a fair target.

The cleric won't have a chance. not rvr specced, won't win any single duel, and now his mission is botched.

The next mission sends to iRVR, so another /rel

Next time another tower: Another soloer here, and the exact same thing happens.

Next time another tower: The red is dead crew is here... another /rel

As you see the cleric in this example won't finish any missions, won't get RAs, and will avoid RvR land in prime time.

You say: But the cleric can duel.

A full rejuv cleric can't, since has no chance. So the "you can join or fuck of" attitude means: You would force your own ideas on the person even to the point where one should respecc and change the habbits even outside of RvR.

The cleric won't like it, so probably will have two chances:

1st: come back with a group and make sure it is the soloer who has to /rel this time. You will get steamrolled, added on your fight, etc.
2nd: don't go to frontier except in off hours, so you forced a hard decision on this cleric.

If later you demand sympathy from a cleric who had either the 1st choice and got yelled at, or the 2nd choice and can't get the RAs you won't get the sympathy.

And no other soloer with same reasoning and attitude will. Not even Gahn.

In both cases you will die.

Most soloers won't skip a lone target because it is PVEing, only a very few will.
And most red is dead crew won't skip a lone target either if it is PVEing, but a very few will. And most of the red is dead crew will be happy to protect the same cleric against members of other realms (happy to steamroll soloers who killed the poor cleric) and they won't make abusive comments when the cleric tries to go back under protection of some friends.

Even if the soloers are sligthly less likely to attack the cleric (they might be in other fights, they might recognize the soloer in time) the help from red is dead crew at other times, the difference in abusive comments will probably make sure: the cleric will side with the red is dead crew.

At least you know who your friends are, and when to run, and ask for help.

Again: Some people from "red is dead crew" who respect others and happy to skip a few fights since others should have some fun, even if they like to fight between armies and attack most enemies they see...

They will see it is easier to cooperate with the PVE people than with the soloer.

So they might skip the odd cleric on mission (or even help the cleric)

And will happily add on the fight of the soloers.

Again: I play with my cleric, I see some hib coming at me while trying to do my mission. I will try to ask friends for help, you will see: you would won against a cleric who tries hard to survive, but 2 scouts add. And you get some /rude-s as well.

I see: you tried to attack me on my mission, but two friends I met while repaing towers helped when I asked.

Who should I side with? The two scouts of course.

If you start flaming against them, post fao threads, they will know: You haven't respected their friends, but you want things your way all the time... So they won't have much reason to respect you. You will get adds and reports.

Why? Because you, in all of this time, failed to understand. PVE people doesn't choose where they get missions. And if you claim all non iRVR non fg areas as solo area that is worse.

If you move solo area away from keeps, towers, and routes to assassin mission: Less conflict will happen.

if you use the dress code: You will know the PVEer, you won't attack the lone cleric, the cleric won't call two scouts, won't be some thread of whine and abusive comments, you won't have two angry scouts adding on your and reporting you many times.

And I say again: A PVEer won't attack you (why? Because a such carebear favors PVE and PVE only because he / she hates to attack other players in any way.) if you don't force him/her to do it and bring adds. So if you leave the PVE people alone they will leave you alone.

Since siege is the only thing I accept in RvR, I know if you pose no threat to our siege, I don't care what you do in the forest nearby.

If you attack the lone guy behind the tower (the one with a treb) that means: you are happy to fight against siege crew, and the same people will attack you (and it might mean adds).

For the love of god, can you condense that down please? I'm at work and have spent to much time reading posts already today.

Overall i'd say there is no point running through some theoretical scenario - we could all do that picking a train of events that illustrates are point - doesnt get us anywhere - could you summarise in terms that dont use such a scenario?

 

[Thorwyn]

...and I´ll say it again (and again and again if you still don´t comprehend it.. because so far I haven´t seen any even remotely useful answer to this):

If you want to do PvE missions in RvR and expect people to leave you alone, you are an RP-horny farmer, who wants easy RP (look at your sig and you´ll get the pun) without the threat of being killed! You want the benefit of RAs without having to work for it.
This, my dear wannabe-role-model, is the significant difference to those people who´re standing in a circle, duelling each other. They all agree on what they´re doing and they´re doing it for the fun. You´re doing it for the profit. If you go out there and want to earn some RP, fine. But there´s always a chance to die. It´s a RvR zone and there are enemies. That´s the risk of XPing in RvR (for which you´re getting an XP bonus) and that´s the risk of farming RPs via missions.

 

[old.Whoodoo]

Sorry, Im gonna say this one last time, this is a Mutliplayer game, if you want to solo, buy a solo game! If in this game you set foot in the frontier, you take your chances, its a war out there, if you die as part of it, then the game is working as intended. Stop trying to rewrite the rules and live with it.

This crap is exactly what I mean, no matter how much you tart it up, ramming this "solo play" crap down peoples necks is greifing just as much as you beleive me killing you anywhere in RvR zones with 1 freind or more.

9 pages of "Ill solo if I wanna and whine when I die" is just pure bull. Everyone has their ways of playing, and greifing is when you either dictate or abuse others because they dont do it your way. The game is based on a war, where people normally just kill or be killed, in RL when it happens there aint a forum to whine on! I can hear Saddam in his grave now, "FECKIN ALLIES ADDED ON MEH!!!"

Get a grip eh.

 

[Gahn]

Soloer is here, sees a lone cleric. Since, like you, he assumes it is solo land since it isn't irvr and isn't fg land, the cleric is now a fair target.

The cleric won't have a chance. not rvr specced, won't win any single duel, and now his mission is botched.

The next mission sends to iRVR, so another /rel

Next time another tower: Another soloer here, and the exact same thing happens.

Next time another tower: The red is dead crew is here... another /rel

As you see the cleric in this example won't finish any missions, won't get RAs, and will avoid RvR land in prime time.

You say: But the cleric can duel.

A full rejuv cleric can't, since has no chance. So the "you can join or fuck of" attitude means: You would force your own ideas on the person even to the point where one should respecc and change the habbits even outside of RvR.

The cleric won't like it, so probably will have two chances:

1st: come back with a group and make sure it is the soloer who has to /rel this time. You will get steamrolled, added on your fight, etc.
2nd: don't go to frontier except in off hours, so you forced a hard decision on this cleric.

If later you demand sympathy from a cleric who had either the 1st choice and got yelled at, or the 2nd choice and can't get the RAs you won't get the sympathy.

And no other soloer with same reasoning and attitude will. Not even Gahn.

Go back few posts and read what Thadius wrote and u'll understand how much of an assumption u just did.

 

[Cromcruaich]

Sorry, Im gonna say this one last time, this is a Mutliplayer game, if you want to solo, buy a solo game! If in this game you set foot in the frontier, you take your chances, its a war out there, if you die as part of it, then the game is working as intended. Stop trying to rewrite the rules and live with it.

This crap is exactly what I mean, no matter how much you tart it up, ramming this "solo play" crap down peoples necks is greifing just as much as you beleive me killing you anywhere in RvR zones with 1 freind or more.

9 pages of "Ill solo if I wanna and whine when I die" is just pure bull. Everyone has their ways of playing, and greifing is when you either dictate or abuse others because they dont do it your way. The game is based on a war, where people normally just kill or be killed, in RL when it happens there aint a forum to whine on! I can hear Saddam in his grave now, "FECKIN ALLIES ADDED ON MEH!!!"

Get a grip eh.

Whatevah. is this is all you can contribute, a totally intolerant and single minded ignorant attitude and completel lack of respect for other players? It really goes to demonstrate the points ive been trying to make about how much more tolerant the fair fight crowd is. Oh, and I hope that is indeed the last time you bother posting on the subject.

Youve shown here a total disregard for some of the posts that have been made, and have ignored the spirit of within which they we're made, to just carry on with your personal one sided vendatta against those players who actually try and be a bit sympathetic to others and make more of the game than a simple red/dead response - those others try and build friendships within the game, and mutual respect across realm borders. What do you do hawking out these tired opinions?

 

[Levin]

Thats an extremely narrow slice of the game. You are completely free to get involved with whatever other rvr is going on, you could even have a go at a duel yourself. That 1v1 person would certainly jump in (on the whole) if you were getting ganked down by more than one enemy - its only in very narrow and specific solo 1v1 arena that they would choose to ignore the fight, if you are fighting against a respected adversary. You still have an absolute myriad of options available. Whereas the reverse situation a soloer who just wants to test his skill against like minded people in fair numbered fights has (admittedly self imposed) restrictions on their play options. And I think that is fair enough - if they dont want to go hump a tower, then why should we say tuff, i'm afraid its red or dead here sonny, if you dont like it, piss off.

Alright let's see. Other RvR options. Sorry if this seems long. If you skip to the bottom there's a little suggestion for a compromise.

Keep takes and big realm raids/zergs? This is what I used to do a lot with my guild. Used to be tons of fun and we had some great charismatic leaders. This died down somehow. Maybe due to the iRvR crowd who not only would not help in the efforts (which was okay as nobody could force them), but they would verbally attack those who took the "wrong" keeps. This eventually lead to a lot of bad will between players and realm efforts as a whole died down. When I quit playing, there hadn't been any normal keep takes in ages, and many of those who used to organize them had already left.

Duelling/Soloing. Sure. I'll go out with my RR3 theurgist and try to take on the leet dudes. I have no buffbot but oh well. This will only lead to frustration as those who already have strong toons easily devour the rp cows who dare try them on. After feeding the enemies enough realmpoints you give up.

Repairing keeps. I suppose that's a way to make a living. Not my idea of fun though. Besides, with the keep takes gone, there's nothing left to repair.

Frontier missions. Again, not a whole lot of fun. Mind you, sometimes you'd find enemies, but most often they were "soloing" and if you touched them while someone else was as much as looking at them, you'd get "adder fffs!!!!" shouted at you.

So, in my opinion the options left to the "lemons", as censi so endearingly call what I assume must be the casual rvr players, are to gang up on those who are stronger than us and try to beat them that way. Whether we make little groups of 3-5 and attack whatever we think we can take on, or if we spontaneously help eachother by "adding" it's all according to the game's rules. It's a hard world out there, us weaklings adapted to it and use wolf tactics against the bigger predators. That is until the big predators started to cry "unfair". In all other multiplayer games i've played.. when the weak players whined, the strong ones would say "so gather up a crowd and beat us!" Here, it's.. well, different.

In your answers, Crom, I take it that you want the small fish to suicidally go up "honourably" against the big fish. You know they won't stand a chance that way, and it would hardly be a challenge to the hardcore pvp guys. If find myself wondering why you are so adamant in suggesting that "weaker" players should feed the bigger guys easy rp like this. And no, it won't get better as we "learn the ropes" because many simply don't have the time and/or opportunity to get the best skills, gear and realm ranks to become equal with the experienced pvp:ers. There will always be differences in character strength, and yet everyone want to have fun while playing. It's not fun, imho, to go into a fight you know is pointless.

All this said, this discussions feels very pointless as we will probably just have to agree to disagree, as someone said. What I think we could agree on, is that both playstyles should be possible. I definately understand the need for soloers to be able to challenge enemies without getting interrupted, just as I hope you understand the need for the non leet players to be able to get some fun out of rvr too.

Regarding the whole adding issue, I think this is muchly a flaw in how the game is built. It's currently built for my kind of players, who want the red is dead approach. It would have been rather easy to implement some kind of "no-aid" property that you could activate on your toon. If you're engaged in combat with an enemy, nobody else can hurt that enemy while you are alive. Kind of like the PVE-thing they implemented? That way, everyone could add to their hearts content. Those who don't want the help will not suffer from it, and equally important, those who want and need help will get it.

Cromcruach, you seem like a reasonable guy. How about you guys who want a way to pvp without adds make a suggestion to Mythic to build it into the game? Maybe like my suggestion, or some other clever solution that you can come up with. Just please, in the meantime, don't get irritated with people who just play the game and try to have fun in the best way they can! It really isn't their fault Mythic built it all this way, and being angry at the players is a little bit like cursing at the fish for getting wet when you fell in the lake.

 

[Sharkith]

Levin,

Crom is not saying you should fight fully buffed people one on one. He is saying find your space in game, carve it out and respect that others around you might get their kicks in a different way. Some people get a kick out of playing in a different way to you so leave them to it you don't have to gank them silly. If you can get buffs then feel free to join them. If you can form a decent group feel free to join in the FG scene.

Basically what Crom is saying is there is a gaming world out there a space to meet and share experiences of a game in many different ways. Can people learn to respect how each other enjoy the game? I think they probably could and it shouldn't be that hard. No-one has the right to tell anyone how to play but it would be nice if people learned to share the space rather than demand that each other learn to behave the way they want them to.

Thats all he is saying. I think its a simple plea. Don't you?

Sharkith

 

[Levin]

Sharkith, I wholeheartedly agree with what you're saying. You read the last bit of my post, right?

I think what's wrong is that the different playstyles conflict with eachother, and therefor people get upset with eachother. If Mythic could instead build in ways to facilitate different playstyles without them hurting eachother, I'm sure all would be happy.

Sadly, I think this would be necessary, as you can't expect a whole gaming population to know about and follow unwritten rules that can easily be broken with how the game was built.

 

[Sharkith]

Hi Levin,

I do agree with you and in fact I did write to Mythic about this issue. But it take resources to change a game and there are many things too old about DAOC. Changing the game is the only real solution.

I would prefer it if people who play the game could and were left alone to sort their own problems out and a server where a solution was found would be a good place to play wouldn't it?

 

[Conway]

Levin,

Crom is not saying you should fight fully buffed people one on one. He is saying find your space in game, carve it out and respect that others around you might get their kicks in a different way. Some people get a kick out of playing in a different way to you so leave them to it you don't have to gank them silly. If you can get buffs then feel free to join them. If you can form a decent group feel free to join in the FG scene.

Basically what Crom is saying is there is a gaming world out there a space to meet and share experiences of a game in many different ways. Can people learn to respect how each other enjoy the game? I think they probably could and it shouldn't be that hard. No-one has the right to tell anyone how to play but it would be nice if people learned to share the space rather than demand that each other learn to behave the way they want them to.

Thats all he is saying. I think its a simple plea. Don't you?

Sharkith

I think Levin just explained to you at length why it is not so easy to 'carve out your own space' in game.

People do need to learn to respect each other but that is not a one way thing. As I posted before, the fg scene got their respect in Agramon, some of them would try and demand their rules be accepted in unreasonable places, like the zerg in the middle of iRVR. There was also the problem of people getting hassled over attacking or defending a keep or tower because it was in conflict with what a subgroup of players had decided to do to arrange iRVR. This went on to an extent that even someone known for leading BGs would think twice about leading a keep retake or something and tell me that they would lead one but they were tired of the hassle. They wanted to organise things to give people fun, not to get aggressive messages. The small fry would probably have been equally if not more intimidated out of doing things.

I'm out of touch with exactly what is going on these days, so I'm speaking on personal experience which is out of date, but so are you.

 

[Sharkith]

*stuff*

and

I'm out of touch with exactly what is going on these days, so I'm speaking on personal experience which is out of date, but so are you.

Levin and I agree perfectly well. I agree with you as well. I am also well out of date.

The last statement holds though. Wouldn't it be a nice server where you could play a game how you like when you like. Where there was a place for everyone and where there was no personal attacks?

I never really gave up that idea even though I walked away. It saddens me when a company is forced to make unilateral decisions for people. That is depressing.

 

[Esselinithia]

For the love of god, can you condense that down please? I'm at work and have spent to much time reading posts already today.

Overall i'd say there is no point running through some theoretical scenario - we could all do that picking a train of events that illustrates are point - doesnt get us anywhere - could you summarise in terms that dont use such a scenario?

Yes.
PVE people go where their missions tell them to go. They have at least as good reason to be there as a soloer or anyone else. So you can't say they should go elsewhere to PVE. And if you attack them, you should expect counterattacks.

Red is dead people can kill PVE people about as much as soloers. BUT Red is dead people often help their ream mates who get attacked while doing missions. And they never flame the PVE guy for bringing friends to the battle for protection.

Thorwyn[B&Q]: The risks with these missions aren't only from other players, it depends on class, etc.

BUT(!) you want to earn normally PVE rewards with RvR? Fine.
PVE people want to earn normally RVR rewards with PVE. Fine as well.

No differentce.

I want my RPs the only way that is fair in gaheris: turning in some seals. That should be fine as well. Animists got their nerf so it should be ok now.

I honestly don't care if I have to deal with RvR people on normal servers, I will get my RAs sooner or later. I don't need that much. Getting RAs wih mission is slow anyway, if I would want fast and easy RAs I would join the IRvR zergs, I heard with rezzes, healing, etc. you can make good RP there.

But if I am working to get my RAs, away from irvr zerg: I have two choices: Do missions alone, or do stuff with help. Both are fair ways to get RP.

If I can't do them alone? So be it. I will do them with help.

If soloers killed me on 3 missions and I go back in group and fight back, they shouldn't whine because a group ran through them.

Their actions are the only reasons for bringing the group and adding on them. And in RvR you should accept the risks of dieing to others, and risk of adds.

If you leave others alone they will have less reason to add on your fight and stop you when you want to have your fun.

Your choice
You can attack - and get attacked later, and can face groups of friends.
Or you can decide to live and let live - I will be doing my missions you will duel.

But you can't blame me for your own decision.

You want to 1v1? find a fight. Noone will stop you. The rules allow adds, doesn't allow organized fights, you can roam. If you roam we won't meet much.

I have my fair chance at missions.

If I see people "soloing" at many keeps? If they attack me: My chances are much lower than the standard chances for fair rp, because you steped out of rules.

I have 3 chances: Go to zerg.
Bring friends.
Ask for help from a GM.

Any of it is a fair and valid way.

If they don't attack? So be it, why should I care about their ring?

 

[Esselinithia]

Wouldn't it be a nice server where you could play a game how you like when you like. Where there was a place for everyone and where there was no personal attacks?

Sharkith: for this reason, everyone should make a compromise. Not a big one, but a small one.

If a Soloer says: I don't attack the PVE guy...

The PVE guy won't have to bring frends to get missions done, and the soloer won't get adds because of it.

The moment the soloer attacks the PVE guy (happened not once), one side has to change. And this change is to bring friends to be able to do tha mission. These friends will kill the soloers in the area.

Now we have 2 unhappy person: The PVE guy who has to roll in an RvR team. (when RvR people can get PVE rewards without PVE, so asking for getting RAs without RvR is a fair and even request) And the soloer who got killed by groups. (And maybe the helpers added on his fight against either the PVE person or anyone else)

After some whine and flame, we have a bunch of unhappy and angry person attacking each other.

And it is natural as long as the first step happens.

But on Gaheris, it is a whole different story. We don't attack each other, so I am sad only when all my favorite places are camped.

 

[Levin]

Let's just hope Mythic has learnt from this. I haven't read a lot about WAR, but there is seems they at least have different ways to PvP? Scenarios, campaigns, and whatnot. Perhaps these issues will be solved there, then?

I suppose maybe it's too late to fix this for DaoC, but... one still wishes they would. It's a damn good game afterall, and just look at all these passionate people in this thread. We got at least one thing in common - the love of the game!

 

[Sharkith]

Let's just hope Mythic has learnt from this. I haven't read a lot about WAR, but there is seems they at least have different ways to PvP? Scenarios, campaigns, and whatnot. Perhaps these issues will be solved there, then?

I suppose maybe it's too late to fix this for DaoC, but... one still wishes they would. It's a damn good game afterall, and just look at all these passionate people in this thread. We got at least one thing in common - the love of the game!

Yes it is a brilliant game and still comes out top in PvP for me.

WAR has a lot of different options for playing and is definitely innovative. I think Mythic have certainly learned from DaoC - whether it comes close in terms of PvP remains to be seen. I am hoping it does and really looking forward to seeing how it pans out.

Yeah the one thing that keeps bringing me back here is the passion of the people on the forums.

 

[Nate]

Woo Sharkith's back! I've heard the NFD crew are making a return? ;o Will be nice to see you on the battlefield again!

 

[Conway]

The last statement holds though. Wouldn't it be a nice server where you could play a game how you like when you like. Where there was a place for everyone and where there was no personal attacks?

It would be brilliant, but I think everyone concerned needs to take a huge step back for that to happen. The whole alarm clock raid thing. I hated that as much as anyone, but when we poured contempt on it maybe that fuelled the fire.

The whole honourable player label is a bad idea imo even though the 'polite' people use it. The minute you label one group honourable, you are actually also labelling others dishonourable, and they get annoyed, and that don't help everyone sit down and work out how to respect each other and get along. What makes someone honourable in a game is a pretty wide subject, and for me its about more than just rvr. I have my own list of the 'dishonourable' things to do in game. We all do.

In fact, using any label on someone that they aren't happy to use to describe themselves is a bad starting point for negotiations.

 

[Wyst]

OK, where to start.....

Apologies to those who havent had to read one of my excessive posts before as I generally dont post here (nor frequently read), but this thread at least has generally been interesting

Griefing

Deliberately doing something to cause grief (sadness, anger, frustration or some other negative emotion) to someone else or some other group of people. Not necessarily a dictionary perfect definition but one that serves from my point of view.

People cause grief in many ways to others in this game, some purely by game design, some by atitude they display ingame, some by atitude they display in forums such as this and I shall try and explain my points on each of these three areas seperately.

Game Design

There are various features in the game which have and continue to encourage some forms of griefing.

ToA (I only joined the game after ToA was live) was the ultimate source of game grief to me and many of my guildmates for a prolonged period of time due to camping and farming. I lost track of the number of PMs that would come along where people would get told to shove off, mob camped, etc etc by all members of the community, but more often than not, in my experience, the aggravation was caused by people who were primarily concerned with RvR from the more elite RvR guilds. Some had more reasonable etiquette and some were more polite than others, but some just treated people as random nobodies who should just leave them alone. The greed factor was also horrific.

Stealth classes have always been from my point of view, classes designed to cause grief on enemy players. They are designed to be this way and everyone knows they exist. This does not stop them causing grief to the enemy whether they are honourable, zergers, or whatever. They prey on the weak for the majority of their kills and the really powerful/well played ones can prey on the strong as well. This does not however deter from the way they were designed to prey on the weak. It is definitely no fun for the person involved to be that weak person who gets annihilated, whether it be by a solo assassin, a bow user from a tower or a group of stealthers working together, after all, grouping up merely lifts the level of what they then can consider weak and increases the available targets.

Buffbots. Ok not necessarily a game design feature, but more of a game development, but a feature I personally think should have been stamped out for the benefit of the game as a whole. They dont cause direct grief, but they have allowed people to be able to do things purely by themselves, for their own selfish needs, which fragmented parts of the community into those that have and those that dont. No BB generally means you cant compete effectively in solo RvR anymore, thereby increasing the tendency to want to group up with people, most of whom have BBs (as they are so prevalent) and dont necessarily want to group with you. This also occurs in zerg/siege warfare, I have lost track of the number of times I see solo casters in seiges who dont want a group, dont want a rezz, as they can get better rps solo and cant seem to function without full BB buffs. I know there are some selfless people out there who use their BBs to do a lot of good for their guildmates etc, but personally Id rather BBs werent in the game. And yes I am probably slightly biased in this as I have never had one, and have no intention of getting one.

Ingame atitude.

Specifically here I am thinking about realm-mates as they are the people easiest to interact with. It is a respect thing in most cases. I have always tried to treat people ingame in Hibernia the same way I would like to be treated myself. Maybe this is because I am a nice guy in real life and I dont generally like harsh confrontation (see comment above regarding my not posting/reading this forum). Most people ingame I can generally come to some understanding with, even if we are in disagreement, some though are just beyond talking to. I am sure this is the case in all realms. Personally I have always thought that the game had 3 types of people in it, those that were genuinely good players, knew this to be the case and had nothing to prove and would generally respect my respectful atitude, those that thought they were outstanding players, wanted desperately to be considered L33t (or whatever the technical term is) and thought they could prove this to be the case by behaving like arseholes and trying to be the big kid in the playground, and those who just played for fun, it is a game after all, and dont really care if their bunch of pixels dies a few times as long as they gain some enjoyment. I have run with groups from all three categories, and have generally had fun with people from the first and the last category. The people in the middle I just try and ignore, or leave groups if there are people in them that cause me frustration. Thankfully, and possibly due to my liberal atitude, the middle group is quite small, but it is still prevalent, and for some people I imagine this group of players is larger than it is for me. I have also regularly seen peoples atitudes to my character change when they find out who my main character is, where they were perfectly prepared to behave antisocially to an alt, a quick relog followed by a pm suddenly sees a different atitude. I guess this is as much to do with how well known my alts are compared to my main character, but it does illustrate a point that various posters made earlier about how they get rude and offensive pms from people and yet other people dont either get them or dont find them as rude/offensive. If the person sending them (usually from the second category above) has a tendency to be insulting to people they dont know, or think it would be "cool" to have an arguement with, then it is usually the casual players in group 3 who will feel the brunt of this, not the people in group 1 who they spend most of their time trying to suck up to in the hope of becoming considered "great".

Forum activity

As I have already stated, I dont post here or read here often. Why? purely because the general level of posting I find to be antisocial and because it causes problems in game. Some folks seem to think that being a FH personality gives them some ability to be superior to others and gives people a channel to extend the playground atitude beyond the limits of the people they can interact with ingame. Quite frankly I have seen several posts/threads where people have claimed that their views stand for the majority of the players, whereas it is far more likely that they represnet the views of the majority of FH readers. Even at its peak of 100+ players, there were only a handful of Marsh Horde members who read FH even occasionally. We just dont see the need. I have no epeen I need to promote, I have no need to randomly whine about stuff, I have no need to see if anyone has randomly whined about me. I am a nobody on FH, therefore for a lot of the FH community, I may as well be a nobody ingame who can be treated however they choose as there is very likely to be no comeback on FH, the place where they have built their reputation in whatever way they chose. Even if one of these non FH personalities does come onto the RvR section and post about something they are usually met with fairly standard derogatory responses as the "incrowd" instantly side with one another in the same old flamefests.

While it is stretching things a little to call out of game forums a form of griefing, they do have such an impact on ingame actions and peoples responses in flamefest threads then pass over into ingame actions. I could easily sight the huge discussions I entertained when MH joined the NFD alliance concerning the actions of Teamzerg. People genuinely were slagging my guild off without any of them having actually had personal bad experiences of Teamzerg and basing all their preconceptions on FH rants. Therefore FH whine (and the FH reaction to it from Teamzerg <sighs>) was causing my whole guild grief. That is just a personal example, but other people who are equally representative of a far higher proportion of the community than a lot of the FH posters regularly get slated on here because of some Leetist ideals, alternate playstyles etc.

The promotion of alternate playstyles has been discussed in this thread a lot as being part of what is griefing. I specifically used the word alternate as the game is aimed at full scale rvr and therefore soloing and fg v fg I deem to be alternative to the norm. Clearly a majority of people who post on these forums are active (or were formerly active) members of the sub-communities ingame who followed one of these alternate playstyles. I personally dont have a problem with people making this choice, the thrill of the solo kill or the amazing fg v fg fight are indeed some of the best experiences you can have in the game, but the amount of hypocrisy and blatant stupidity sometimes displayed by members of these sub-communities is often completely baffling. Soloing in an area where they are likely to get run over by people who dont even know they are an outstanding honourable member of the soloing community because they dont read FH? not that clever imo. Running for FG rvr and repeatedly trying to zergfarm and then <shock horror> getting run over by the zerg? Promoting people to try and form pugs and roam a bit, then rolling them over repeatedly with RR10+ fixed groups who then insist of rofl spamming them or at least the members of said group who may have been part of a zerg before? And all of this followed by the extensive flamefests, slagging off or whine on this forum? Outstandingly bright behaviour wouldnt you say? And yet this behaviour goes on day after day after day as all the various factions gradually drive each other from the game as they feel their ability to get the holy realm point has been hindered by another faction or their own particular way of getting enjoyment has been hindered by someone else who hasnt read the top ten list of best players on FH, best guild etc etc but just saw someone who was an enemy and decided to help kill them because they looked a little hard and had put themselves in a place to be shot at.

Entering an RvR zone should perhaps display an information bulletin

"You are now entering an RvR zone. Be prepared. If you are solo then you can expect to meet people in larger numbers. The maximum group size is 8 people, but be prepared to meet enemies in larger numbers as it is allowed for more than one group to congregate in the same area. There are people out there with better skills, templates and numbers so be prepared to die occasionally, THIS IS ONLY A GAME"

I do not categorise myself as "red is dead", "soloer" or "fg v fg" but as a casual player and more likely to act based on how someone has acted to me ingame than any random crap posted on here. I would suggest that the same goes for a majority of the remaining player base. We have no wish to be FH superstars and display l33t atitude and likewise dont read the forum often to know who everybody is. More often than not, as far as I can tell from my limited reading here, the people who want to actively promote the alternate playstyles to engender a better enjoyment for themselves, so a pretty poor job. They just slag off anyone and everyone who doesnt immediately show agreement with their point of view and try to make arguements as to why their playstyle is better than anyone elses. Get a better atitude and you may get better responses. There are a few exceptions. I would say the Crom does an excellent job at providing reasoned arguement, tho most of his audience on here already agree with his point of view. Muyl also makes some very valid points, but he is on stage with the preverbial tough crowd who would rather slag him off (that said Muyl was very wrong with the whole incident with TT, sorry Muyl but waaaay out of order). There are probably others as well but they get drowned out in all the rubbish sometimes.

Complaining about stuff on FH is not gonna change the way that the majority of the people play the game as the audience is only a small part of the population. While a good whine thread can be funny to read, often it is at the expense of someones feelings and a more tolerant approach or at least less aggressive approach is far more likely to engender a proper return of the community in my opinion.

Apologies to anyone who has suffered their way through a Wyst lecture for the first time and I have no doubt there will be a lot of people here who dont agree with my views or dont choose to agree with me on some or all of this. That doesnt mean I dont respect your points of view, just that we disagree.

Now I'll bugger off and leave you in peace

Wyst

 

[Sharkith]

Wyst - repped for many many good points sounds as always even if my eyes bled when I first saw it.

 

[Sharkith]

It would be brilliant, but I think everyone concerned needs to take a huge step back for that to happen. The whole alarm clock raid thing. I hated that as much as anyone, but when we poured contempt on it maybe that fuelled the fire.

The whole honourable player label is a bad idea imo even though the 'polite' people use it. The minute you label one group honourable, you are actually also labelling others dishonourable, and they get annoyed, and that don't help everyone sit down and work out how to respect each other and get along. What makes someone honourable in a game is a pretty wide subject, and for me its about more than just rvr. I have my own list of the 'dishonourable' things to do in game. We all do.

In fact, using any label on someone that they aren't happy to use to describe themselves is a bad starting point for negotiations.

/wave Nate

I hope we can get out into RvR soon but it is going to take time to round up the troops.

Conway I totally agree once more with your post. A step back is what I needed for one. I ain't getting into forums politics anymore just going to add a view here and there. On the creating boundaries thing.

It is depressing to see it. Calling players by type is a big mistake and causes the worst kind of flaming on these forums. Rather than worrying about everyone else it probably would pay a lot of people to just think more about themselves and maybe go find a decent place to do their thing.

Agramon worked really well but to want a solo fight on DC bridge is insane. Sorry but I have always said it and I will continue to say it Soloers need to go to one of the coastal drop off zones away from everyone else.

 

[Shike]

haha, excellent stuff Wyst, although I think that you take a forum alittle too.. seriously but most else I agree with wholeheartedly.

I seriosly use FH as 90% entertainment, probably more. I blab about random shit and just type whatever I feel like typing and I have never claimed anything else either. Sometimes debates are interesting and some.. like this one has been is just plain boring :< I also like to strike down on people like Muylatrix since he in some ways tells us that he represents some type of player or playerbase or a majority or whatever and I truly believe there is no such thing, nobody can walse in and think they can represent the minds of thousands of people, the thought alone is ridicilous and I do like to make a mockery out of such people, that I admit. Me myself is just some random nub trying to pass time at work usually and I feel that most things that can be said about DAoC and its players already have been said, over and over and over again and well... nothing's really new anymore, I dont know why some people try and categorize so heavily like in this thread though, I think casual and noncasual is quite enough as categories. I cant really see the need for some of the rubbish in this thread at all :S

I think wyst put it all forth in a good way, clear and concise and well, thats that. Funny to see your view of posters like me too^^

 

[old.Whoodoo]

Whatevah. is this is all you can contribute, a totally intolerant and single minded ignorant attitude and completel lack of respect for other players? It really goes to demonstrate the points ive been trying to make about how much more tolerant the fair fight crowd is. Oh, and I hope that is indeed the last time you bother posting on the subject.

Youve shown here a total disregard for some of the posts that have been made, and have ignored the spirit of within which they we're made, to just carry on with your personal one sided vendatta against those players who actually try and be a bit sympathetic to others and make more of the game than a simple red/dead response - those others try and build friendships within the game, and mutual respect across realm borders. What do you do hawking out these tired opinions?

And hereyou are thrusting your opinion again, and this is exactly my point, if you dont like what others think of the game, this is the result, abuse. Its no vendetta to have my say in how the game is intended, its my point of view, some debate it is reading the inane drivel you post everywhere in every thread you can find to post your beleifs, then shoot people like me and Ess down in flames. Even when its pointed out to you, you do it more!

If this debate had happened 3-4 years ago the result would have been the opposite, and the majority would have said red n dead, the fun was in killing enemies, not just gaining RPs, that was a bonus. With the dwindling population many have looked at things differently, but the basic premise of the game remains that an enemy is an enemy.

Ive said what griefing is to me, not allowing people to have their ways to play and be left in peace, and having their own opinions without insults or abuse from players who think they know better. You it seems fit my bill of a greifer down to a T.

 

[old.Whoodoo]

Stuff

Wow, the only word I can find for this is respect! Best post on this forum Ive ever read, thanks for taking the time Wyst!

 

[Thorwyn]

Thorwyn[B&Q]: The risks with these missions aren't only from other players, it depends on class, etc.

BUT(!) you want to earn normally PVE rewards with RvR? Fine.
PVE people want to earn normally RVR rewards with PVE. Fine as well.

No differentce.

[...snip...]

Sorry to join the bandwagon, but it´s almost impossible to communicate and discuss with you, because you seem to think that the more you´re writing, the better your arguments. But that´s not the case. Nobody is gonna read through your endless columns, especially when they tend to contain the same strings of "logic" time and time again and all you achieve is that people stop taking you serious.

Again, I still didn´t get an answer from you about this (please try to make it short):
What exactly - in your opinion - is the difference between

1. farming rps via PvE and trying to eliminate the threat of getting killed while you do so (i.e. asking other people to leave you alone while you´re on your mission)

and

2. farming rps via duelling and trying to eliminate the threat of getting killed while you do so (i.e. asking other peolpe to leave you alone while you´re duelling).

 

[Levin]

Good post Wyst.

I think it's a good thing for everyone to try and rise above the arguments about the details of the matter. We've already established that there are some different playstyles, and we've established that they hurt eachother when they clash. People on all sides feel treated badly. We have established that the current game is pretty much built to only accommodate the "kill all enemies" playstyle.

OK.

I think it's best if we all just agree that neither side will want to give up their style of play. What we should discuss is what (if anything) can be done with that fact in mind. I do not believe in unwritten rules and unofficial agreements between players. Not in a game like this. Instead, my preferred solution would be for Mythic to realize the problem, and build in some tools in game to make sure the playstyles can coexist.

Question. Is this problem as common on the US servers? Or is it isolated to the English GOA realms? If so, that might explain why they don't understand the problem and haven't done anything about it.

 

[Esselinithia]

What exactly - in your opinion - is the difference between

1. farming rps via PvE and trying to eliminate the threat of getting killed while you do so (i.e. asking other people to leave you alone while you´re on your mission)

and

2. farming rps via duelling and trying to eliminate the threat of getting killed while you do so (i.e. asking other peolpe to leave you alone while you´re duelling).

Differences:

1st: The amount of RPs you can earn in any given time so RP/Hour and RP for effort ratio. In the case of missions it is as designed.
2nd: The Missions are designed as an in game way to give PVE people a chance to get RP without fighting enemies. (same as getting TOA credits in RvR) You can't say the same for dueling rings.
3rd: PVE people try to work harder in PVE, since that is their challenge, they won't be proud of Realm Ranks, etc. and the RAs will support other people. For Solo people the advantage will be used where you compete with others, and will reduce the fair chances of others

3 quite significant differences, there are many smaller ones