Orrery

Seurimas

Iazamat said:

All I have to say is that this is quickly going to become a cycle of escalation: shrine goes up at orrery, shrine gets dusted, person gets hunted into oblivion outside the orrery, slighted tether retaliates and escalates further.

I'm not really sure this is a cycle either tether wants to be trapped in or perpetuate, so instead of memeing on one another and clicking the LOL react, maybe approach this like adults.

Seurimas said:

I smell a nice, organic holy war in this Orrery

Iazamat

Sure, Seurimas, go ahead. I'm not stopping anyone, saying they shouldn't, or even reprimanding the use of the shrine - it's clever. I just think it has potential to get out of hand and we can discuss Rhyot's opinion, the wider implications of shrine use at orrery, and the consequences without pecking at one another.

Rijetta

If it becomes a holy war which order gets to fight Bene and.. whoever else is left in Slyphe's order? The whole shadow tether, since we're all attending Orrery? I don't think a holy war is a good idea in this scenario.

Benedicto

Rijetta said:

If it becomes a holy war which order gets to fight Bene and.. whoever else is left in Slyphe's order? The whole shadow tether, since we're all attending Orrery? I don't think a holy war is a good idea in this scenario.

It's just me. We don't really count Valingar anymore.

We are at the top of KILLSTATS though!

Ardent

Benedicto said:

Rijetta said:

If it becomes a holy war which order gets to fight Bene and.. whoever else is left in Slyphe's order? The whole shadow tether, since we're all attending Orrery? I don't think a holy war is a good idea in this scenario.

It's just me. We don't really count Valingar anymore.

We are at the top of KILLSTATS though!

1. Sorry to hear that Slyphe order is poof.
2. Killing your own team with calamity shouldn't count. <_<

That aside, I'm not sure why it would be okay to put a shrine in a zone that is -always- open PK. Just seems curious to me. Cause even when it's not active, if I get bored and skim through the room I have aura and have to go sit around a bit or risk the pain train.

Phoenecia

Edit: yeah, nope. Holding my tongue. 

Savas

Shadow won this orrery and most of the fights by a landslide, so please don't take this as salt.

First of all, I have to say kudos to whoever thought to use shrine powers. It was a good idea and I don't have any hard feelings about it. Still, I don't like the concept of adding shrine/Order conflict into the Orrery. Whichever tether has a shrine there is going to have an advantage, and I feel something should be done to address this before it gets silly.

Either remove the ability to place shrines around that area, OR if shrineplay is something the community would sincerely enjoy, then remove defilement aura from defiling shrines in the Orrery space. I wouldn't mind either personally.

edit: to clarify, it's the conflict bleeding out of the Orrery and into the rest of the game that bothers me and I think most people who would like to see a change. Defile aura lasts 24 hours.

Iesid

Iazamat said:

All I have to say is that this is quickly going to become a cycle of escalation: shrine goes up at orrery, shrine gets dusted, person gets hunted into oblivion outside the orrery

While I believe you are right and that this will escalate to a distasteful level, I wish we all had the restraint to not really do that last one I put in bold.

Kill 'em, sure - but try to find a way to get fun out of it for both parties as opposed to just yourself. Speaking for myself, but were I in the position of being a shrine holder in this little spat, I would probably try to keep shit even and tell people not to blow it out of proportion. It's about the same as setting up a battlefield before a fight you know will happen; it's clever gameplay and a great way to get some back and forth in the hours between orrery rounds or whatever.

All I'm asking is that maybe we try to self-moderate if this is the path we are going down.

Haven

Why not just declare an Order War?

Benedicto

Ardent said:

2. Killing your own team with calamity shouldn't count.

Hey, I would say that only 50% of those kills are calamity kills and of those only 25% are my own team!



@Haven due to the size of the order it would obviously just be declined against 95% of the Orders that would choose to declare it.

@Iazamat / @Iesid - the shrine was defiled and a second in Scidve proper (albeit on the mountainside/approach to Orrery) had begun to be defiled (although this shrine had never been used in any kind of tactical capacity). As of this moment no attacks have been made on the culprit and I'm content to leave it as part of the Orrery contention which is now over.

Benedicto

Although to update the above, to find several shrines destroyed outside of Orrery/post Orrery is a different matter altogether. Especially when it's being done out of petty spite/boredom. This was from 6:30pm GMT yesterday.

(Mayhem): Naro says, "But I might start going back to my old ways."
(Mayhem): Naro says, "And defile every shrine."
(Mayhem): Naro says, "Pk anything."
(Mayhem): Naro says, "And i'm getting bored lol."

As I log in this morning.

You reach out to your God to reveal the heretics of this world:
The heretic Naro is shown to your mind.
Equilibrium Used: 3.00 seconds

Haven

In that case, yeah, I'm with @Rhyot: a change to the system is needed.

Czcienn

I just found it funny because there are so many reasons to hate the mechanics of Orrery and the shrine seemed so minor especially since I think it is something we actually have some control over.

Haven

I would be fine with shrine use as it is clever but the fact of the matter is auto-surrender changes the nature of the conflict entirely. The defiler now has to be open PK for 24 RL hours to counter the Order's tactic meanwhile the offending Order doesn't have to be despite being the aggressor. That's not fair.

Couple of solutions to have:

1. Have Orrery/Open PK Zones negate shrine powers
   
2. Don't give defilement aura while defiling in an Orrery/open PK zone
   
3. Make surrendering a Holy War cause the losing Order to lose 75% of their shrines on top of the normal penalties.
   

Any one of these solutions fixes the issue.

Rhyot

Iesid said:

Iazamat said:

All I have to say is that this is quickly going to become a cycle of escalation: shrine goes up at orrery, shrine gets dusted, person gets hunted into oblivion outside the orrery

While I believe you are right and that this will escalate to a distasteful level, I wish we all had the restraint to not really do that last one I put in bold.

All I'm asking is that maybe we try to self-moderate if this is the path we are going down.

Over the years, it has been shown and proven that we cannot self-moderate. Look at forums, look at the complaints people say, look at the actions people take (both in PVP and out of PVP). We, as a playerbase, have no sense of self-moderation. So trying to hope for self-moderation is not going to happen. So Iazamat is 1000% correct in that IT WILL devolve into people being hunted down continuously. We all know that defilement aura lasts for 24 hours and while you have that aura you are open PK to EVERYONE (sure, it usually sticks with the Order, but not always necessarily the case).

Czcibor said:

I just found it funny because there are so many reasons to hate the mechanics of Orrery and the shrine seemed so minor especially since I think it is something we actually have some control over.

I could think of other mechanics that I dislike about the Orrery, but the rest of those have some form of counterplay that doesn't involve griefing people. Shrine placement is the only real negative aspect here that can become VERY griefy. Sure, Holy Wars exist, but Benedicto can't fight Chak/Ios/Ivoln Orders by himself. And if he tried to fight Bama, it would cause a sociopolitical split between Enorian and Duiran that would likely never be repaired.. at which point Spirit side would lose any and all cohesion unless everyone became a Bama congregate member.


I'm not asking for a huge change to the Orrery. Both sides can deal with the entrenchment tactics (because both sides have to deal with that on a daily basis in lessers and majors). While yes, shrines are also occasionally seen at lessers, they aren't used in such a manner to provide ill-received field advantages. All I'm asking is that shrines be removed and unable to be laid AT the Orrery mountaintop and the surrounding rooms LEADING UP TO the Orrery mountaintop (effectively the 26 rooms after going UP at v10162).

Rijetta

I like the suggestion to just remove defilement aura for removing a shrine in an open pk area. Or shorten the length of the aura. That leaves open a tactical choice but doesn't open up the defiler to 24 hours of "idle or die".

Nisavi

I'll note that I'm down for either solution of simply not allowing shrines in the Orrery proper or not allowing a defilement aura against shrines in Open PK areas.

My main issue, as @Savas has already stated, is when the conflict bleeds out from the Open PK domain of the Orrery and into the game as a whole because we have to get rid of the large tactical advantage that a shrine in that area offers. The ability to Shrine Travel and bypass literally every defense, to include an ensorcelled aegis upon arrival, is pretty large. The inability or hesitance to remove it because of a 24 hour Open PK flag is a bit of a loophole, in my opinion, that can allow for individuals to drag conflict out of the Orrery itself.

I also don't think that ylem shards should be able to be used to auto-raise shrines in Open PK areas either. Have your team stand there and defend you, otherwise the risk is gone by comparison to the group that has to stand there vulnerable while the other side defiles for 10-15 minutes.

Drystin

The ability to Shrine Travel and bypass literally every defense, to include an ensorcelled aegis upon arrival, is pretty large.

Not really. There are plenty of ways to bypass defenses like that which are better choices anyway and those methods aren't going anywhere. 

Nisavi

Drystin said:

The ability to Shrine Travel and bypass literally every defense, to include an ensorcelled aegis upon arrival, is pretty large.

Not really. There are plenty of ways to bypass defenses like that which are better choices anyway and those methods aren't going anywhere. 

Like which? Every movement I've seen in the game will proc an ensorcelled aegis upon arrival. Shrine Travel didn't.

Iazamat

If there are movement/travel skills that place you in the same room as an aegis, at the same elevation, on the same plane, and they aren't procing aegis, those skills should likely be bugged.

Benedicto

Rijetta said:

I like the suggestion to just remove defilement aura for removing a shrine in an open pk area. Or shorten the length of the aura. That leaves open a tactical choice but doesn't open up the defiler to 24 hours of "idle or die".

I am for this idea as well.

Teani

Perhaps disabling shrine powers in that area when Orrery is active would be a good solution. That way Order business is not mixed into Orrery stuff.

Rhyot

Rijetta said:

I like the suggestion to just remove defilement aura for removing a shrine in an open pk area. Or shorten the length of the aura. That leaves open a tactical choice but doesn't open up the defiler to 24 hours of "idle or die".

I disagree with this because it doesn't stop someone from using their Shrine powers to get an advantage. Sure, you can take down the shrine and not get defilement aura, but unless it gets nuked, you still have the ability to use various powers such as: Encompass, Healing, Paroxysm, Retribution, Shielding, Soulrend, and Travel.

While Paroxysm and Travel were the only abilities that I can confirm was used, there is no real reason why the other abilities can't/won't be used. If all abilities above are used/can be used, then it provides a much more difficult means to fight off entrenchment.

Iesid

Well, time to post another hot take:

I am against the notion that we shouldn't mix Peanut Butter (Shrines) and Chocolate (Orrery). We don't need stuff segregated into such bland lanes, we just need to act like adults. Just handle it IC and self-moderate. Stop blaming a person for making a sound tactical decision and just respond to it instead. I mean, ffs... y'all won Orrery and you're still complaining about the shrines, and this gives off the perception of a sore winner.

Situations like this make organic conflict, so long as one side isn't a bad actor. At this current time, I do think one side is being a bad actor. Ngl, chain defiling shrines an order without an active god, whose only member isn't on during Aetolian primetime, when the order is otherwise empty, is a pretty low blow. Especially when the person doing the defiling is basically giving no options for recourse.

That's not self-moderating. That's you being a bad actor. Anybody cheering this party on is also a bad actor.

Edit: in this case, self moderation would be going after the shrine in question in this thread and just that shrine.

Rhyot

It does have to be separated though. That's the thing, Iesid. If we don't separate the two, there is GOING to be points of contention that will spill out from the intended avenue of PVP. As I had previously mentioned, we as a playerbase cannot self moderate. And I can start naming off supporting reasons that prove that we have no self-moderation. Additionally, I am not blaming anyone for utilizing a shrine to give themselves an advantage.

It was a sound tactical choice that was unexpected due to the fact that it's never been previously utilized (except during Holy Wars). More so that it was used when they were outnumbered. The tactics behind it I can understand. So it is not "being a sore winner". However, the problem remains is that Divine Orders should not have sway inside the Orrery, let alone have abilities used inside Orrery. Nor should either side be able to have such an edge all because they have a shrine in said location (Shadow or Spirit).

And yes, while the conflict can be organic, by being organic it -will- devolve into chain defilings. I'm sure that the individual has an RP reason for doing what they are doing, just as I am sure the Order will have an RP reason for doing what they have to do to retaliate. While it is organic conflict, the amount of conflict that is going to arise from such actions is going to become negative and some people are not going to be happy about it.

Iesid said:

Ngl, chain defiling shrines an order without an active god, whose only member isn't on during Aetolian primetime, when the order is otherwise empty, is a pretty low blow.

Also.... you remember when Templars blew up 40 shrines when the people of Iosyne's Order was all offline. Pepperidge Farm remembers.

Haven

Using an Order to attack at the Orrery for tactical advantage is clever and poses an interesting element/challenge to a skirmish. No one is denying this. However, once the dust settles you have to think about the long-term implications and I think it's a legitimate discussion we should be having.

Strip the issue of the politics and look at the core elements of what's happening: The only realistic counter to a shrine is to destroy the shrine. Destroying the shrine, however, also makes the person open PK for 24 PLAY TIME hours and therefor extends the conflict beyond the scope of the original 10-15min skirmish. One might argue that is an acceptable risk for removing your opponent's advantage until you consider what is the opponent Order risking?

War is off the table because they can immediately surrender to avoid the conflict and thus be immune to further declarations for a year. Advantage goes to Order (1) / Defiler (0). Shrine loss? Again, the advantage goes to the defending Order (2) because any defilers (0) outside of war are open PK to -everyone- and thus the Order can choose to hunt the defilers with friends without any real repercussion for a conflict THE ORDER started.

Is this fair gameplay? What can be done to make it better for all involved? Or is it fine as is? This is what's being discussed here. I do not believe that it is fair if only because the Order can opt out scott-free via auto-surrendering essentially while the affected parties have to either stay at disadvantage or endure a long global flag of open PK to everyone. High reward, no risk (the Order) and a High Risk, low reward (the Defiler) is not good or fair gameplay.

Let's please try and not make this situation more than it is with politics and continue the discussion at hand.

Nisavi

Iesid said:

Well, time to post another hot take:

I am against the notion that we shouldn't mix Peanut Butter (Shrines) and Chocolate (Orrery). We don't need stuff segregated into such bland lanes, we just need to act like adults. Just handle it IC and self-moderate. Stop blaming a person for making a sound tactical decision and just respond to it instead. I mean, ffs... y'all won Orrery and you're still complaining about the shrines, and this gives off the perception of a sore winner.

Situations like this make organic conflict, so long as one side isn't a bad actor. At this current time, I do think one side is being a bad actor. Ngl, chain defiling shrines an order without an active god, whose only member isn't on during Aetolian primetime, when the order is otherwise empty, is a pretty low blow. Especially when the person doing the defiling is basically giving no options for recourse.

That's not self-moderating. That's you being a bad actor. Anybody cheering this party on is also a bad actor.

Edit: in this case, self moderation would be going after the shrine in question in this thread and just that shrine.

In every instance where the playerbase has been trusted to act responsibly, they've shown that there is always someone or a group of people willing to take a mile when given an inch. Unless it's mechanically hard-coded or ruled against, there's always going to be someone if history is any indication.

Stine

Rhyot said:

Also.... you remember when Templars blew up 40 shrines when the people of Iosyne's Order was all offline. Pepperidge Farm remembers.

Tatia, Ayuna and Mazzion were all online. 95% sure Meltas was too. Comparing Iosyne's order (chock full of players, with an active god) to Slyphe's order (basically 1 player with no active god) is beyond a reasonable comparison.

Benedicto

Rhyot said:

Also.... you remember when Templars blew up 40 shrines when the people of Iosyne's Order was all offline. Pepperidge Farm remembers.

1. Patently false. Most of the order were online, they just didn't do anything about it.

2. Remember when the Templar and more specifically me was roundly criticized for that decision and now the same people that were shouting down the houses are now the ones encouraging the same behavior?

Seurimas

Iesid said:

Well, time to post another hot take:

I am against the notion that we shouldn't mix Peanut Butter (Shrines) and Chocolate (Orrery). We don't need stuff segregated into such bland lanes, we just need to act like adults. Just handle it IC and self-moderate. Stop blaming a person for making a sound tactical decision and just respond to it instead. I mean, ffs... y'all won Orrery and you're still complaining about the shrines, and this gives off the perception of a sore winner.

Situations like this make organic conflict, so long as one side isn't a bad actor. At this current time, I do think one side is being a bad actor. Ngl, chain defiling shrines an order without an active god, whose only member isn't on during Aetolian primetime, when the order is otherwise empty, is a pretty low blow. Especially when the person doing the defiling is basically giving no options for recourse.

That's not self-moderating. That's you being a bad actor. Anybody cheering this party on is also a bad actor.

Edit: in this case, self moderation would be going after the shrine in question in this thread and just that shrine.

I'm not up to date with whatever "chain defiling" may have happened, but I assume it was either:

* Original defiler found an easy target and defiled wantonly, beyond necessary for the Orrery.

* Original defiler received retaliation for their defilement, and escalated to defiling other shrines in retribution.

I think the first one has little to do with the Orrery, even if it started there. That's just someone picking a fight. Can't anyone go around defiling shrines for whatever non-reason they choose, basically? I'm not well versed in shrine PVP rules. This case has a bad actor, probably (the chain defiler).

The second one seems like a natural progression for this conflict. That's the order picking a fight. This case has no bad actor. Maybe we'll get aura-free defiling in Orrery, but, right now, they've got aura and they're in control of how they respond to grief they receive for having aura.