Bounties

Haven

Calipso said:

As much defense as is being put into the current bounty system by the same 3 players over and over again (not a shock that they are the same players accused of griefing people out of the game) it is clear the fact that this -same- topic is being brought up time and time again that the current Bounty system is not only flawed by extremely over-abused. As @Arbre said, you cant expect new players to go around reading the laws of every city because "hey they should have known!". This is a game, not a class assignment. 80% of what the bounty system has been giving to Aetolia is exactly as was said above: Players quitting, players being beaten up by top fighters for stupid mistakes, and players who arent even interested in combat being forced into it.

The system needs a major overhaul. It was a Mistake to ever have given players the power to place Open PK status on others players and im really not sure why this was ever approved.

I disagree. If you attack any organization in any way, you're giving consent and confirmation to that organization that you're interested in conflict with them. That is including combat. Combat may not have been the desired outcome of that conflict but you're not being forced into it at all.

While it is a little disheartening to see top tier fighters go out of their way to hunt / chase down people of the lower rungs, they are by no means doing anything wrong. If anything, a lower rung person should be seriously re-thinking attacking or antagonizing an organization as large as a city.

If players are quitting over the bounty system, I'd dare say that there is a different issue at the heart of it and details that are missing/being over-looked somewhere.

Toz

As a note, as far as that particular shrine goes: Organizations can defend, so far as I am aware, one room outside of their territory (approaching Enorian, etc.) - the room in question was 1 room outside the Shadow Keep, which only has one way in/out. An army (with someone enemied to the guild) outside it poses a threat, regardless of what they are there for. If I was outside Enorian playing chess, I'd still probably get thrashed. Maybe there's some vague line that separates the guild hall from a city, but I do know if you went after a shrine just outside of Bloodloch or Spinesreach, you'd be considered 'raiding' and thus able to be attacked, so that's the way we approached it. I know I at least couldn't have cared less about the shrine, guild enemies outside the Keep isn't good.

Haven

Toz said:

As a note, as far as that particular shrine goes: Organizations can defend, so far as I am aware, one room outside of their territory (approaching Enorian, etc.) - the room in question was 1 room outside the Shadow Keep, which only has one way in/out. An army (with someone enemied to the guild) outside it poses a threat, regardless of what they are there for. If I was outside Enorian playing chess, I'd still probably get thrashed. Maybe there's some vague line that separates the guild hall from a city, but I do know if you went after a shrine just outside of Bloodloch or Spinesreach, you'd be considered 'raiding' and thus able to be attacked, so that's the way we approached it. I know I at least couldn't have cared less about the shrine, guild enemies outside the Keep isn't good.

Personally, I would've taken down the shrine -agggeeeessss- ago. Your Lord/Lady of Light outside -MY- Shadow Keep? Not on my watch. And then I'd use that awesome lynching mechanic the Carnifex have on their mountain to hang the corpses of slain enemies!

But yeah, I agree with the stance.

Seir

I'd consider one room out of the Shadow Keep to be territory that they'd be allowed to defend, really. However, by that same token, the folks defiling the shrine could ask people to get involved if only to repel the Carnifex causing them issue. The people who get involved just have to be willing to accept the price of an enemy status.

Daskalos

See, that applies to city defense but I'm not sure how it applies to your guild, which is a very special case being outside of a city. We were very obviously not there to attack your Keep - we sent PHENDEGWEN to defile it. He posed such a big threat that your group attacked him, so I came and ran 'em off. Last I checked, Phendegwen wasn't an enemy of the Carnifex, though I am. On the flip side, we defiled a shrine 3 rooms from Bloodloch and no one bothered us. Also, had we called in anyone outside the order to help (not that we needed it) we would be faced with issues...

We didn't issue once during either of our Holy Wars, despite people outside of the opposing Orders interfering a time or two. Yet the moment Seir showed up to help me in the Fracture, which is an Open PK Area, after Ellenia brought non-Iosyians in, she filed an issue faster than Illidan can load up LoL.

 

I wish we had Order Alliances

Toz

@Daskalos: Zion/Belgarion were out there earlier, and Zion at least was a guild enemy (and now so is Belg), so everyone was still antsy about it/defending the Keep - except me, I guess. I went to bed.

@Haven: Iosyne is the patron/matron/whatever the term is of the Carnifex, hence her shrine being there.

Edhain

Orus said:

In my brief stints playing in Eno when Edh was around, I seem to recall you getting smiliarly leveled/skilled people to take care of them rather than  bountying them, Edh.  Or maybe you bountied them and told similarly skilled people to handle it, I honestly am not sure.  Either way,  to me that feels a lot more interesting and gives people a chance to form a realistic and fun nemesis rather than  being rolled by PileofArtifactsfighter#22435.

Which one is more likely to keep people around an in the game?

Yeah, this was my preferred method and I'm flattered you remember... but at the same time, I wasn't much for giving a series of warnings or offering chances to opt out of the fight. Killing innocents is a very big deal in my character's book, to the point that he'd lose fairly close friends over it (Exzuryx, etc). So I figure everyone has their own way of giving leniency. 

Haven

Toz said:

@Daskalos: Zion/Belgarion were out there earlier, and Zion at least was a guild enemy (and now so is Belg), so everyone was still antsy about it/defending the Keep - except me, I guess. I went to bed.

@Haven: Iosyne is the patron/matron/whatever the term is of the Carnifex, hence her shrine being there.

Oh. I thought Dhar's or some lifer's shrine was there or something.

Yeah, I dunno if I support that stance then... I'd say that's poor placement of a shrine as it conflicts with the spirit of Order Wars being strictly between the respective orders. If anything, only congregation/Order members of Iosyne within the Carnifex guild should've lept to defend it even if it was LoS/one-room-out of the Keep.

Aldric

The post was kinda buried, but what about like somebody else said in the thread in regards to only being able to accept a bounty if you're within X levels of the person. I'd say 15 levels would be a fair amount, up until endgame anyway. 

That would provoke combat still, whilst similarly preventing (hopefully) utter curbstomping people. Maybe give them a fight they could actually learn something from rather than obliteration with no chance. 

This would also encourage cities and guilds to get their lower-leveled members involved, which would in turn make those players feel useful and desired, which is something we're always stressing we want to emphasize.

Toz

'The post was kinda buried, but what about like somebody else said in the thread in regards to only being able to accept a bounty if you're within X levels of the person. I'd say 15 levels would be a fair amount, up until endgame anyway. '
EDIT: Missed a condition. Still too lazy to quote.

I kind of dislike this for a number of reasons, not one of which being that level doesn't necessarily equate to pk skill. I don't think this is something that should be hard-coded either, but something that's a little more RPly enforced. Maybe make a tiered bounty system or something - got somebody who's a low threat? Put them at a low tier. It'd just be a suggestion, I guess, but sort of a 'hey little guy who wants to be useful! This is a bad guy who's pretty little too, go get 'em!' - of course, it'd be up to he players to actually honor it, but hey. I can dream.

Haven

Aldric said:

The post was kinda buried, but what about like somebody else said in the thread in regards to only being able to accept a bounty if you're within X levels of the person. I'd say 15 levels would be a fair amount, up until endgame anyway. 

That would provoke combat still, whilst similarly preventing (hopefully) utter curbstomping people. Maybe give them a fight they could actually learn something from rather than obliteration with no chance. 

This would also encourage cities and guilds to get their lower-leveled members involved, which would in turn make those players feel useful and desired, which is something we're always stressing we want to emphasize.

Wouldn't work unless I'm not understanding what's being proposed. What's to stop me from killing someone and then having someone else that meets the level range requirement turn in the bounty/accept it? Unless you're proposing that you're also only allowed to turn in the bounties of people you've personally killed?

All in all, I find this to be completely unnecessary to implement. If someone wants to cause conflict and contend with people around their own might and not the top-tier fighters then they should do just that by engaging organizations that do not include those people. Don't pick fights against cities/huge PK intensive organizations/etc and you won't get strong-armed. You shouldn't get free-reign to cause conflict just because you're inexperienced or new.

Calipso

Haven said:

Calipso said:

As much defense as is being put into the current bounty system by the same 3 players over and over again (not a shock that they are the same players accused of griefing people out of the game) it is clear the fact that this -same- topic is being brought up time and time again that the current Bounty system is not only flawed by extremely over-abused. As @Arbre said, you cant expect new players to go around reading the laws of every city because "hey they should have known!". This is a game, not a class assignment. 80% of what the bounty system has been giving to Aetolia is exactly as was said above: Players quitting, players being beaten up by top fighters for stupid mistakes, and players who arent even interested in combat being forced into it.

The system needs a major overhaul. It was a Mistake to ever have given players the power to place Open PK status on others players and im really not sure why this was ever approved.

I disagree. If you attack any organization in any way, you're giving consent and confirmation to that organization that you're interested in conflict with them. That is including combat. Combat may not have been the desired outcome of that conflict but you're not being forced into it at all.

While it is a little disheartening to see top tier fighters go out of their way to hunt / chase down people of the lower rungs, they are by no means doing anything wrong. If anything, a lower rung person should be seriously re-thinking attacking or antagonizing an organization as large as a city.

If players are quitting over the bounty system, I'd dare say that there is a different issue at the heart of it and details that are missing/being over-looked somewhere.

I wish that was true, but I have seen instances that it is not, here is an example. A novice of a Shadow org was enemied to Enorian for simply being undead, which I guess is somewhat okay, and they continued with their lives. This novice goes out hunting and then while exploring the land go the game, accidently walks into Enorian and dies to guards. Having entered while enemied this novice suddenly finds a bounty over their heads and is then targetted by combatant..the novice almost gets fed up from the harassment and refusal to remove said bounty.

Do you think this is a good use of the bounty system?

Ezalor

Does that actually happen though? It's a big no-no in Bloodloch to bounty newbies (or anyone really) who simply walked in by accident without hostile intentions. I'm sure (hopefully) Enorian has a similar policy.

Haven

Calipso said:

Haven said:

Calipso said:

As much defense as is being put into the current bounty system by the same 3 players over and over again (not a shock that they are the same players accused of griefing people out of the game) it is clear the fact that this -same- topic is being brought up time and time again that the current Bounty system is not only flawed by extremely over-abused. As @Arbre said, you cant expect new players to go around reading the laws of every city because "hey they should have known!". This is a game, not a class assignment. 80% of what the bounty system has been giving to Aetolia is exactly as was said above: Players quitting, players being beaten up by top fighters for stupid mistakes, and players who arent even interested in combat being forced into it.

The system needs a major overhaul. It was a Mistake to ever have given players the power to place Open PK status on others players and im really not sure why this was ever approved.

I disagree. If you attack any organization in any way, you're giving consent and confirmation to that organization that you're interested in conflict with them. That is including combat. Combat may not have been the desired outcome of that conflict but you're not being forced into it at all.

While it is a little disheartening to see top tier fighters go out of their way to hunt / chase down people of the lower rungs, they are by no means doing anything wrong. If anything, a lower rung person should be seriously re-thinking attacking or antagonizing an organization as large as a city.

If players are quitting over the bounty system, I'd dare say that there is a different issue at the heart of it and details that are missing/being over-looked somewhere.

I wish that was true, but I have seen instances that it is not, here is an example. A novice of a Shadow org was enemied to Enorian for simply being undead, which I guess is somewhat okay, and they continued with their lives. This novice goes out hunting and then while exploring the land go the game, accidently walks into Enorian and dies to guards. Having entered while enemied this novice suddenly finds a bounty over their heads and is then targetted by combatant..the novice almost gets fed up from the harassment and refusal to remove said bounty.

Do you think this is a good use of the bounty system?

Going by just your example: I would call it neither good or bad use of the bounty system. Lazy if anything on part of the person placing the bounty for not investigating if the person was a novice or not and just blanket bountying. But I wouldn't call this wrong or abuse or harassment.

Edit: Truthfully, most people in the game as far as I know would remove the bounty despite not having to do so provided said novice was civil.

Here's how most Aetolians in my experience have gone about similar situations:

Newbie1 walks in and dies.

Newbie1 is bountied.

Newbie1 asks why they were bountied.

Aide explains why.

Newbie1 says something along the lines of: Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't know. New around these parts.

Aide reconsiders bounty and more often than not removes the bounty.

Newbie2 walks in and dies.

Newbie2 is bountied.

Newbie2 asks why they were bountied.

Aide explains why.

Newbie2 says something along the lines of: ...uh, yeah. That's stupid. Take it off now. Amg, harassment.

Aide shrugs/replies/whatever but ultimately keeps the bounty in place.

Calipso

Ezalor said:

Does that actually happen though? It's a big no-no in Bloodloch to bounty newbies (or anyone really) who simply walked in by accident without hostile intentions. I'm sure (hopefully) Enorian has a similar policy.

That is a true story yes.

Another one that actually happened 2 days ago. A novice of Spinesreach died while hunting and a member of Enorian had confused them with being of the same city as them. This member goes, grabs the corpse, takes it to Enorian and rezzes the novice there..who is an enemy. The novice instantly dies to guards. For being an enemy that was within the city, the Novice then has a bounty placed on their heads...


The novice was close to fed up and quitting and I hate the fact (well..slightly hate) that I had to involve myself in the situation and throw threats around just to remove such a farce. Cali no like bullying.

Xavin

Ezalor said:

Does that actually happen though? It's a big no-no in Bloodloch to bounty newbies (or anyone really) who simply walked in by accident without hostile intentions. I'm sure (hopefully) Enorian has a similar policy.

Is this actively enforced? I've heard of people getting bountied simply for mapping through cities they're enemied to.

Ezalor

From the time I came back and actually got involved in things I have never seen it happen (and there have been many instances where people were killed accidentally walking into the city since then). The closest thing to trivial cause bountying was @Aren painting "REPENT EVIL CREATURES" at the crack and I think that warrants a bounty.

We even had a Bahkatu novice run around the city freely because he wasn't enemied. He was kicked out and enemied afterwards but no bounty placed.

EDIT: Edited because it sounded like I enacted this policy or something, which isn't true. Just meant that I have never seen it happen in that time period. I've found the current BL group pretty moderate/conservative with their bountying, actually.

Calipso

Haven said:

Calipso said:

Haven said:

Calipso said:

As much defense as is being put into the current bounty system by the same 3 players over and over again (not a shock that they are the same players accused of griefing people out of the game) it is clear the fact that this -same- topic is being brought up time and time again that the current Bounty system is not only flawed by extremely over-abused. As @Arbre said, you cant expect new players to go around reading the laws of every city because "hey they should have known!". This is a game, not a class assignment. 80% of what the bounty system has been giving to Aetolia is exactly as was said above: Players quitting, players being beaten up by top fighters for stupid mistakes, and players who arent even interested in combat being forced into it.

The system needs a major overhaul. It was a Mistake to ever have given players the power to place Open PK status on others players and im really not sure why this was ever approved.

I disagree. If you attack any organization in any way, you're giving consent and confirmation to that organization that you're interested in conflict with them. That is including combat. Combat may not have been the desired outcome of that conflict but you're not being forced into it at all.

While it is a little disheartening to see top tier fighters go out of their way to hunt / chase down people of the lower rungs, they are by no means doing anything wrong. If anything, a lower rung person should be seriously re-thinking attacking or antagonizing an organization as large as a city.

If players are quitting over the bounty system, I'd dare say that there is a different issue at the heart of it and details that are missing/being over-looked somewhere.

I wish that was true, but I have seen instances that it is not, here is an example. A novice of a Shadow org was enemied to Enorian for simply being undead, which I guess is somewhat okay, and they continued with their lives. This novice goes out hunting and then while exploring the land go the game, accidently walks into Enorian and dies to guards. Having entered while enemied this novice suddenly finds a bounty over their heads and is then targetted by combatant..the novice almost gets fed up from the harassment and refusal to remove said bounty.

Do you think this is a good use of the bounty system?

Going by just your example: I would call it neither good or bad use of the bounty system. Lazy if anything on part of the person placing the bounty for not investigating if the person was a novice or not and just blanket bountying. But I wouldn't call this wrong or abuse or harassment.

How is this considered a good use of the bounty system? Accidently entering a city you are enemied to is actually pretty common and i've seen it occur on several occassions. A bounty should be placed if the person was actually raiding..not if they took the wrong turn on a path and got slapped down by a guard and now have Open Pk status floating above their heads. This kind of enforcement is what brews general hate and dislike for the game mechanics and policies.

Areka

The bounty was removed from the rev incident the same day it was placed. 

While I do think the bounties for the mapper mis-fires are stupid, it also only takes a moment to speak up. Worst case is it's left on. Best case, it's removed. Communication needs to happen on both sides. 

Rivas

Ezalor said:

Does that actually happen though? It's a big no-no in Bloodloch to bounty newbies (or anyone really) who simply walked in by accident without hostile intentions. I'm sure (hopefully) Enorian has a similar policy.

Xavin said:

Ezalor said:

Does that actually happen though? It's a big no-no in Bloodloch to bounty newbies (or anyone really) who simply walked in by accident without hostile intentions. I'm sure (hopefully) Enorian has a similar policy.

Is this actively enforced? I've heard of people getting bountied simply for mapping through cities they're enemied to.

It happened to me not a few weeks ago, actually. Trask had been enemied to Eno a few days prior just for being a Cabalist, a few days later my automapper ran me through Eno and I promptly died to guards. When questioned ICly, I explained it was a mistake (I think I blamed it on my mount being an idiot)...when teased OOCly over a clan by my Lighter buddies, I admitted it was a mapping error and I wasn't, in fact, trying to stage a one-man raid with my war ram, no entities and a RP mob that followed me around.

Those Lighter buddies then killed my mount and bountied me.

Sure, I griped a bit and it sucked...but once I took a breath (and a beer) it was fine. I even had a bit of fun with Zion, considering he was the main one hunting me for it. When he finally caught up with me and ganked me proper, the general attitude between the two of us was very much a friendly, "Ahhhhh, good one, y'finally got me!" kinda vibe. He wasn't griefy, he wasn't abusive, it was all good.


Moral of the story: Yeah, the bounty excuse sucked, but it's all in how you choose to receive/accept it.

Haven

Calipso said:

Haven said:

Going by just your example: I would call it neither good or bad use of the bounty system. Lazy if anything on part of the person placing the bounty for not investigating if the person was a novice or not and just blanket bountying. But I wouldn't call this wrong or abuse or harassment.

How is this considered a good use of the bounty system? Accidently entering a city you are enemied to is actually pretty common and i've seen it occur on several occassions. A bounty should be placed if the person was actually raiding..not if they took the wrong turn on a path and got slapped down by a guard and now have Open Pk status floating above their heads. This kind of enforcement is what brews general hate and dislike for the game mechanics and policies.

Most players would not bounty anyone for something trivial like this, let alone a novice. On the occasion that it does happen, novice or no, it would be reversed more often than not provided the target was civil in the exchange if only as an OOC courtesy/nod to the other player's genuine mistake.

However, bounties can be used to help foster/compliment/maintain a certain kind of role-play environment the organization/individual is going for. To that end, I would not call it harassment/abuse (on an OOC level anyway) should a bounty stick for something as small as accidentally walking into an enemy's city. I'd like to think the person doing the bountying tossed a bit of role-play the other person's way to make the trivial slight at least enjoyable and more meaningful for both parties but alas that's not a requirement.

Ezalor

That actually seems like a huge dick move and very griefy tbh, especially the killing the mount part added onto that.

Orus

Ezalor said:

That actually seems like a huge dick move and very griefy tbh, especially the killing the mount part added onto that.

I'd probably reconsider who I called buddies and who I called unicorns after something like that.  The ribbing? Sure, stupid crap happens and being able to have a good time is one thing.  The mount killing/bountying just seems unnecessarily dickish wrapped up in "HAHA, HARD KNOCK LIFE."

Theo

 has put a bounty of 2000 gold on Sabon's head. Reason: Entering city while enemied.

People get bountied in Enorian all the time for this. It is stupid to me really, I figure if you die to the guards for coming in unless you are raiding deals done go away.

Xavin

I do know that at one point in time it was common for bloodloch to bounty people who enter while enemied. I'm rather pleased to hear that they no longer do that unless it's an actual raid situation...or am I misunderstanding?

Ezalor

Doesn't happen any more. Closest thing I can think of was when @Angwe ran through Bloodloch and yelled something like "Catch me if you can!"

He got a bounty for that .

Areka

What ends up getting me is that the trespass-bountying ends up watering down trespass, and can be a major unicorny thing. Arania (who I don't know beyond this incident) got bountied in Enorian for trespassing after she died to guards when her mapper misfired. That's just lame. 

In turn, people tend to respond to things badly. She'd been really cool about it. Othertimes? Like with enemy statuses, it's "Take it away now or I'll X," like making threats logically links to removing enemy statuses or bounties.

WIth this stuff, sometimes RP needs to take a lesser role for the sake of the larger playing vibe. Your character may be an uncompromising unicorn who wouldn't normally take the time to negotiate or talk, but especially with people who aren't prominent in their trouble making, just take the time to talk it out a bit. These actions and handling end up representing entire organizations, rightly or wrongly. It super turned me off to Bloodloch when Tralendar enemied Areka to it when she was a secretary in Infernals, and that's fine for RP vibe, but also nulled a lot of potential interaction with the utter lack of willingness both from their security minister, as well as overlords at the time, to even open up a dialogue beyond 'suck it'. Errybody's gotta be a little bit flexible. 

Calipso

Areka said:

What ends up getting me is that the trespass-bountying ends up watering down trespass, and can be a major unicorny thing. Arania (who I don't know beyond this incident) got bountied in Enorian for trespassing after she died to guards when her mapper misfired. That's just lame. 

In turn, people tend to respond to things badly. She'd been really cool about it. Othertimes? Like with enemy statuses, it's "Take it away now or I'll X," like making threats logically links to removing enemy statuses or bounties.

WIth this stuff, sometimes RP needs to take a lesser role for the sake of the larger playing vibe. Your character may be an uncompromising unicorn who wouldn't normally take the time to negotiate or talk, but especially with people who aren't prominent in their trouble making, just take the time to talk it out a bit. These actions and handling end up representing entire organizations, rightly or wrongly. It super turned me off to Bloodloch when Tralendar enemied Areka to it when she was a secretary in Infernals, and that's fine for RP vibe, but also nulled a lot of potential interaction with the utter lack of willingness both from their security minister, as well as overlords at the time, to even open up a dialogue beyond 'suck it'. Errybody's gotta be a little bit flexible. 

perhaps but you also have to take the victim's position in this. They feel mistreated and as if a bully city-state has just tossed the executioner's axe at them for a small mistake on their part of walking in the wrong direction, naturally they would lash out at them. Also you have to remember that the player shouldnt be forced to have to do some RP and find contacts in Enorians AFTER the bounty was set because of a rule Enorian enforces. It is generally enforcing this city's enforcement upon another player that most of the time wants nothing to do with it. Should never try to force someone to have to interact or RP if they arent even looking for it in the start.

Edit: Edited for clarity.

Angwe

...What? @Calipso, would you mind editing the first part of that for clarity, it's a bit hard to understand what you're trying to say.

Moirean

In regards to the issue that started this, I don't have any problem with new players seeing conflict. That's cool and it teaches them stuff. As I have already said, I was irked that instead of them being chased out, they were just bountied instead. The kids didn't even know how venoms worked until like 20 minutes before the bounty, but when they got hit by an arrow they were eager to try regardless. Instead, it directly escalated into a bounty because they didn't die to a single remote hit of voyria.

Personally, I don't really think cities should bounty for hunting in villages, unless someone flagrantly keeps doing it for the PKs. Torston, especially, is kinda a jerk spot for Enorian to claim, since it's the best sub-100 spot to bash for gold. I made a special point of detouring there during the first Enorian war, just so we could claim it back and I could bash there ("keeping them in line") because of how lucrative it is.