Community Behaviour

2

Comments

  • TrikalTrikal Member Posts: 156 ✭✭✭
    Drystin said:

    I'd really like to see both tethers and all guilds/orders/cities growing a pair and acting IC how they were made to without people getting upset OOC. 

    That would lead to all out war, of which we have no system to actually make that happen.

    If people played in their roles Enorian would be always at war with Bloodloch. This is something that just doesn't work so far as I've seen. So instead we have the play nice and give each other some kind of respect. There's not a lot of players in this dying gamestyle of MUDs so respecting each other a little goes a long way.

    From everything I've experienced in the past though, an order declaring all-out war on a guild is a one way ticket to issues upon issues. I don't see why the other way around isn't considered in the same light.

    AloliDrystinHawa
  • AloliAloli Member Posts: 352 ✭✭✭✭
    Aeryx said:
    Here's my perspective, as someone who is a run of the mill non-leadership Templar who participated in this. Benedicto did set it up in character. The meeting was interesting, and we even had someone from the Syssin trying to spy on it and got killed for it. 

    Myself, and my character both, think it was sort of corny to pick the easiest target. 

    Did me or my character make note of that? Nope. Do I think that picking the easiest target is something not worth doing? Nope. It drives conflict. I took down shrines, solo, by myself. 

    It was the first time I've ever done it on this character or the last character I played. It was interesting. Noone came to stop me, and hell, nobody has even enemied me to the Order.

    If the Order doesn't care enough to even enemy me, then why have someone jumping in to call it 'griefing'?
    Hey Aeryx, I find it confusing to read that even though you were involved in the RP and seem to have enjoyed playing along with it for you to write that the guild picked the easiest target order when clearly they went after the logical one. From what I am reading the order chosen had the most RP reasons to go after, not the easiest. In earlier posts Bene explained an easier target would have been a different order. 

    I also want to echo some of the notions already expressed here. When something confusing happens IC I believe it is just as easy to ask for clarity and retaliate in character. Give your written persona life and let it deal with the situations that come at it. Let it grow from those experiences without souring them with too much out of character plotting and losing the surprise. 

    If I made Aloli walk into Stine's restaurant tomorrow and slapped him to death because it's not decorated well and that's offensive, I fully expect him to react in character. I don't certainly don't except to get a message on discord about it let alone a forum post (Sorry for using you as an example!).
  • AeryxAeryx Member Posts: 110 ✭✭✭
    Aloli said:


    Aeryx said:

    Here's my perspective, as someone who is a run of the mill non-leadership Templar who participated in this. Benedicto did set it up in character. The meeting was interesting, and we even had someone from the Syssin trying to spy on it and got killed for it. 

    Myself, and my character both, think it was sort of corny to pick the easiest target. 

    Did me or my character make note of that? Nope. Do I think that picking the easiest target is something not worth doing? Nope. It drives conflict. I took down shrines, solo, by myself. 

    It was the first time I've ever done it on this character or the last character I played. It was interesting. Noone came to stop me, and hell, nobody has even enemied me to the Order.

    If the Order doesn't care enough to even enemy me, then why have someone jumping in to call it 'griefing'?

    Hey Aeryx, I find it confusing to read that even though you were involved in the RP and seem to have enjoyed playing along with it for you to write that the guild picked the easiest target order when clearly they went after the logical one. From what I am reading the order chosen had the most RP reasons to go after, not the easiest. In earlier posts Bene explained an easier target would have been a different order. 

    I also want to echo some of the notions already expressed here. When something confusing happens IC I believe it is just as easy to ask for clarity and retaliate in character. Give your written persona life and let it deal with the situations that come at it. Let it grow from those experiences without souring them with too much out of character plotting and losing the surprise. 

    If I made Aloli walk into Stine's restaurant tomorrow and slapped him to death because it's not decorated well and that's offensive, I fully expect him to react in character. I don't certainly don't except to get a message on discord about it let alone a forum post (Sorry for using you as an example!).



    Aloli, in the in character meeting we had, Benedicto stated, in character, that Chakrasul and Bamathis were both obvious options, but that we chose to go with Iosyne because of political reasons, as he also stated in this thread. To me it screamed corny to go with the 'easier' option politically, or otherwise. I would have doubled down and picked the hardest one, but I'm also not in the Templar leadership, so I kept my opinions to myself and just did what option I was given. I'm also not saying it was a 'mistake' or that it was 'bad' just that it to me, as a player, and my character, felt a little weak sauce. But that's also just my opinions and how I generally look at things in game and out.
    Source of it all reveals the meaning of life to everyone. Be the spark that will light up the night. You shall be the song that will carry hope. You're invincible, carry on.
    Aloli
  • AxiusAxius where I amMember Posts: 339 ✭✭✭
    Okay, As one of the Iosai who's been putting in the work to help plan our recourse, which there was discussion and plans, and unless I'm getting a message here in the next... I dunno... day or so? I'm gonna assume the RP is going forward.

    This is what I saw go on internally in the situation, and what I personally think, what I personally felt, and sorta the RP that's always been fostered within the Iosyne Order in my experience.

    It came out of nowhere and blind-sided us really. It took the city linked shrines being attacked for any of us to realize what the heck was going on. And as a consequence of us being targetted. The RP of the Iosai is at stake here. We could reach out and ask for help if we wanted to go to war against the Templar, but then again, the Iosai RP has always been insulated in regards to combat. We are a Combat oriented Order, there's room for RP (Axius is proof of this actually), but we don't seek outside help. This is true even when the Order has an average online member status of 4 people. It's why it shocked us that we were A. attacked because of the aforementioned level of 'respect' given, and B. it blind-sided us. Now we are setting in motion gears that I won't discuss in public fashion, but is probably pretty obvious just looking at the situation how we'll respond, with 5 people online on average, and at -least- 4 of them combat ready (mostly. Axius can fight, but is by no means a combatant. Take that as you will) We had to figure out a way to strike back without including outsiders because of the aforementioned RP, and so we had to do something that... personally? My moral compass called a really -really- unicorns move in response, but also was really the only way to respond as far as the Order was concerned. A guild attacked us, we cannot attack the guild, but we -can- attack the Patron of the guild and declare holy war, forcing the guild to be disallowed to assist because it's Ordermembers versus Ordermembers (no congregants allowed to drop/raise/reinforce shrines in response to the war either, only defend at best). And as far as our info goes, there's only one known combatant in the Patron order of the Templar..

    Which brings us back to the topic of this thread, and my feelings on the matter.

    On one hand, you've got a guild that's decided to include a weird optional requirement that has dubious value in its existence to target shrines of the enemy tether for.. some random reason that seems to be at most to incite conflict (which I'm -okay- with. Don't take my tone as chastising this part), and the decision to pick the Order that, while thematically correct, was facing a current underswing in membership as many of our personal heavy-hitters are either no longer logging in for various reasons, or log in very infrequently to handle business, but never really.. -play- the game anymore for longer than 10-15 minutes at a go (because people do have lives outside of the game, we can't fault 'em for it). So we've got a group of.. 6-ish Templar deciding to go around knocking over shrines of an Order who's pre-established RP is to be a pack of wild rabid warhounds sent out to cause pain and malice across the continent in a way that, if one asks the reasons -why-, you'd hear similar reasons to the Warlord's stuff. Instead of targetting.. well... The Warlord's Order is shadow-exclusive still, last I checked. Ya ain't hurting Duiranites by razing Warlord shrines, and you'll have anywhere from 6-8 Bamathian combatants fielding against you in fair combat. And I could reference Chakrasul's Order as being fairly strong too, albeit its presence not being a full straight up combat guild. It -did- win against Bamathian Order after all.


    Respectfully, ya picked a weird target in my eyes, and the consequences are that the RP of the target and the whole thing is going to result in an inverse of the piling situation that's just... not going to be fun for most of us, I think. At least, not for me. I'll stick to the RP I've learned is part of the Order's culture, but I'm not gonna enjoy the path that was picked in response because it was the most logical choice.


    Sorry if this sounds incoherent as crap, I admit, it's 5 am, and I've been awake since noon yesterday. I'm just... rambling off my feelings and thoughts for now.
    Benedicto
  • BenedictoBenedicto Tentacles Errywhere! Member Posts: 812 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited March 4
    The dead Order of three as the original post suggested has escalated to now being Mazzion, Ayuna, Canasius, Tatia, Axius and Meltas. An active order of six at least. I'm sure there are others yet to come out of the woodwork. I'm not sure what Order numbers are usually like for Shadow but that sounds like a relatively healthy Order to me. Though this is in comparison to Slyphe or perhaps even Damariel.

    In respect of the requirement to defile shrines, I'm fairly certain it is a Carnifex requirement in some capacity although maybe @Mjoll might be able to clarify?

    Ultimately, whilst the situation is probably annoying for the Iosian members, nothing was taken that can't be put back in a couple of hours. If the end result has been that it's galvanised you as an organisation, given you new purpose and created RP for you all to plan your retaliation - isn't that somewhat of a good thing? I'm not saying it's all sunshine and rainbows, but ultimately what is it you've lost and what is it you've gained?

    The reasoning outlined above was the exact reasoning/logic given by Bamathis when he ordered his guys to take down Slyphian shrines (obviously revealed and discussed IG). Bene was irked IG as @Phoenecia suggested in her earlier post, but he still went out and did his job and everything was dealt with IG. The same when the Carni targeted his shrines.

    Axius rightly points out that Iosyne is a PK orientated Order and yet they've not touched on (that I've seen) the most obvious form of punishment and retaliation available to them. Every single Knight, PKer or not, is carrying an open-PK aura for their next 24 hours of playtime. They all knew what they were getting into and accepted it as a consequence of what happens. This also plays hugely into their Order RP. They can only respond reactively and wait to be attacked. For individuals such as myself and one or two others, that's not too big a deal (although when you have the threat of imminent Mazzification lingering over you it always provides a certain amount of anxiety) - but for the noncoms, it will be literally terrifying. I'm not saying that to garner any sympathy, they knew exactly what they were getting in for, but in terms of the cost vs reward, I would argue it's very much in the favor of the offended Order. The loss of shrines is a bit of willpower/endurance use and time. The defilers have to face a very real loss of experience on each death and if they want to try and avoid that, a very real crimp on what they're able to do with their playtime.

    This is just as applicable for the requirement (now that we've cleared the backlog) for the new Knights who may wish to pursue it going forward. The argument is that there is no retaliation available on the table but the reality is that the perpetrator paints a huge target on their backs. For what will probably be a good two or three days of playing they'll have to constantly look over their shoulder and be ready to fight.

    I'm assuming the mechanic exists as it does for this reason. Otherwise shrines would not be able to be defiled outside of a Holy War. Perhaps this is a good time to get clarification on the matter from @Tiur / @Razmael.
    Post edited by Benedicto on
    (Leaders): Tiur says, "I'll remember not to delete you when the time comes, Bene. Good people."

  • MjollMjoll Member Posts: 239 ✭✭✭✭
    Benedicto said:


    In respect of the requirement to defile shrines, I'm fairly certain it is a Carnifex requirement in some capacity although maybe @Mjoll might be able to clarify?

    The reasoning outlined above was the exact reasoning/logic given by Bamathis when he ordered his guys to take down Slyphian shrines (obviously revealed and discussed IG). Bene was irked IG as @Phoenecia suggested in her earlier post, but he still went out and did his job and everything was dealt with IG. The same when the Carni targeted his shrines.

    There's an optional task in the second step in one of our 8 paths to dust 3 shrines. One person has chosen that task since I've been GM, and the retaliation for it struck that person's order a lot harder than the three shrines they took down :joy:

    The Carnifex have not targetted an order while I've been playing? I'm not sure when Bene is talking about.
  • PhoeneciaPhoenecia The Merchant of Esterport Somewhere in AtticaMember Posts: 778 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Mjoll said:

    There's an optional task in the second step in one of our 8 paths to dust 3 shrines. One person has chosen that task since I've been GM, and the retaliation for it struck that person's order a lot harder than the three shrines they took down :joy: The Carnifex have not targetted an order while I've been playing? I'm not sure when Bene is talking about.
    It wasn't guild related, but Slyphe's order refused to cure someone, who happened to be Carnifex, of undeath. The person threw a fit and started nuking shrines, the order killed her for it. Repeatedly, when she wouldn't stop. And then Carnifex started rushing in to help her/defile shrines.

    I remember this because I distinctly recall Phoe going off on Cayn about it IC, and I had been enemying people to the order for defiling. 
    Mjoll
  • MjollMjoll Member Posts: 239 ✭✭✭✭
    I remember fighting off a Templar/Talonnb invasion of the guild hall, I didn't know Este-whatever got help knocking shrines over.
  • IesidIesid Member Posts: 107 ✭✭✭
    edited March 4
    Holy War is a terrible system, so I'm sad to see that Iosyne's Order took this route. No offense if the Creator of the system is still present on the staff, but it is fairly antiquated as far as conflict mechanisms go. It favors time and shrine density more than anything else whatsoever and it is a tedious thing to pack or unpack. Putting up shrines, etc is just a boring endeavor overall.

    I'm more sad that they felt forced to - or that some leader lost their cool and forced the rest of the order to. It's clear that, of the six people Benedicto listed, only one is an actually competent/full-time PKer - and he surely wasn't the one that declared the holy war.

    That one person is the only one interested in going around to gank the offending Templar for retaliation purposes. However: the non-coms will stay in their houses, havens, and cities until aura drops. The amount of satisfaction one might get from killing them is pretty minimal anyways, since their role in this was 'warm body'. I'd say that, if they do get ganked, you probably won't be selling them up the river with a chat about consequences. You'll go help them and you might bring some help. Suddenly we're back to square one: a team combat situation at a size/scale that's frankly boring and a level of strength that undeniably outclasses the Order.

    I'm not going to crucify @Benedicto for doing what he did. At least he did something with global effect, something that started potential roleplay - that's something several people complaining at him in this thread cannot claim for themselves. They're using a conversation completely irrelevant to their character to vent their frustrations at him for other purposes. Using this chance for personal attacks is pretty low. That just obfuscates the conversation at hand: how the community should carry themselves when combat gets out of hand.

    This entire thread seems born from the above paragraph. Phoenecia's post is primary example - not very productive and mostly just looking to take a swipe at a community member for petty reasons. Bulrok's post, when his character has no relation to Iosyne, is another one - indignant over the behavior of another player. It's like deja vu all over again when it comes to this stuff.
    Aeryx said:


    Fact: Each side does things to the other that is distasteful.

    This is a matter of opinion, as distaste implies taste, which is subjective.
    Aeryx said:


    Fact: People do find any form of losing in this game toxic(not everyone, but a good amount do), as Mazzion said.

    I have a lot to say on this, but what I will provide now is that willfully throwing the word toxic around doesn't make you a community specialist or anything. 'Some people are sore losers' would have been a far more accurate way to say this.
    Aeryx said:


    Opinion: Out of character things such as webs, clans, and Discord servers have only doubled down on the tribalism. Tribalism in this game will not be solved by the players. It can only be steered into a more positive thing by the administration.

    If you think tether tribalism is something only admin can address, you are painfully mistaken. We are all in control of our actions. We aren't children. This statement reeks of giving up - or worse yet, absolving oneself of responsibility to be part of the solution because there's "nothing you can do". This is not a very good mindset for a city council member's player to have. Please do better.
    Aeryx said:


    My hope: The administration will one day actually figure out what this game is supposed to be about. Is it Shadow vs Spirit or is it Sapience vs Albedos? If you're going to have shades of either option, for the love of god, please stop teasing and pick one of them instead of having both. It doesn't make for anything positive other than the sort of thing we've seen here on the forums tonight and in the game in other avenues.

    You can be both at once. The Sapience vs Albedos conflict is an existential one crucial to the narrative. Shadow vs Spirit is an existential/moral conflict crucial to driving PvP-related activity and the narrative. They are not mutually exclusive. They only feel that way because nobody's character is stupid enough to break the mold and get their city lynched by the other three. We all have one another at gunpoint about Albedi gods due to the Accords and that is a problem that would need to be solved IC. By players. Since, you know, we run the organizations.




    TetchtaAeryxMoxieLin
  • IazamatIazamat Member Posts: 275 ✭✭✭✭
    Phoenecia said:

    It wasn't guild related, but Slyphe's order refused to cure someone, who happened to be Carnifex, of undeath. The person threw a fit and started nuking shrines, the order killed her for it. Repeatedly, when she wouldn't stop. And then Carnifex started rushing in to help her/defile shrines.

    I remember this because I distinctly recall Phoe going off on Cayn about it IC, and I had been enemying people to the order for defiling. 

    Hold up, maybe my understanding of the situation is incomplete, but that's not what happened from my perspective.

    Estella started trying to defile (I don't even know if she got a single shrine, based on how quickly the opposing order reacted) and got dunked on pretty hard for it. After some failed attempts, she started idling in the Carnifex guildhall and some players, including people not at all affiliated with the order whose shrines were being dropped, raided to kill her. She was, as is natural, defended by members of her guild and city. They were killed. The raid continued with some back and forth, and when we discovered the wormhole being used to infiltrate, we started canceling it. While we were doing so, the raiders were sucking people into Esterport and killing them without cause (they had no defile aura and were in their own guildhall after an attempted raid).

    Estella continued to try (and fail) to defile after that series of events. If any Carnifex joined her, it was because of the raid on the guildhall and complete disregard for the rules they were shown during those raids.

    I fully admit there may be more I didn't personally witness, but the chain of events that led to more people defiling seems pretty clear from my end.
    Cayn
  • TetchtaTetchta Member Posts: 272 ✭✭✭
    I'm a bit bemused at some of this, to be honest. Totally get the criticisms of the Holy War system and other conflict vectors, but I thought a lack of global conflict was one of the things people complain the most about when it comes to the modern state of Aetolia?


    AeryxHavenDrystin
  • IazamatIazamat Member Posts: 275 ✭✭✭✭
    I don't think anyone's bemoaning that conflict happened here, I think it comes down more to hypocrisy of it and inability of players to police themselves and consider the effects of their actions on the other players in the game. But that's just my understanding and takeaway.
    TetchtaKodaza
  • IesidIesid Member Posts: 107 ✭✭✭
    Tetchta said:
    I'm a bit bemused at some of this, to be honest. Totally get the criticisms of the Holy War system and other conflict vectors, but I thought a lack of global conflict was one of the things people complain the most about when it comes to the modern state of Aetolia?
    It is, but the sad truth is that most people need guard rails for their PK systems - either based on their own behavior or the behavior of others.

    The only systems that provide guard rails need some revisions.
    TetchtaAeryx
  • IazamatIazamat Member Posts: 275 ✭✭✭✭
    edited March 4
    For the record - and please tell me if this information is incorrect, I am hearing it secondhand - when the producer of our game says something along the lines of "Aetolia is good at running off undesirables" in a public Discord server, perhaps changes to community behaviour need to start at the top.
    MoxieTiurZailaTeaniCayn
  • TetchtaTetchta Member Posts: 272 ✭✭✭
    edited March 4
    Iazamat said:

    For the record - and please tell me if this information is incorrect, I am hearing it secondhand - when the producer of our game says something along the lines of "Aetolia is good at running off undesirables" in a public Discord server, perhaps changes to community behaviour need to start at the top.

    It's hard to say without speculation, but as someone who used to play 10+ years ago and having just returned, the game is certainly less toxic than it was a decade ago. Sounds more like praise for the self-policing of the community more than anything else, although I can see how that might sound troubling coming from the producer. Having spoken with a lot of other players, old and new alike, I've heard similar things: the toxic folk who make the game worse for large swaths of the playerbase are generally less present and less powerful nowadays.

    I would argue that the fact that this conversation has been more or less productive and cordial is also evidence to this point. Although things could always be better.


  • IazamatIazamat Member Posts: 275 ✭✭✭✭
    edited March 4
    Tetchta said:

    I would argue that the fact that this conversation has been more or less productive and cordial is also evidence to this point. Although things could always be better.

    There's more I could add as evidence of needing to start from the top, but it's not mine to share. Suffice it to say that most people haven't seen some of this in the way that a few of us have, and it's definitely not the first time it's boiled over. We may be less toxic overall, but there's definitely something festering in Aetolia.
    Teani
  • HavenHaven World Burner Flight SchoolMember Posts: 2,371 ✭✭✭✭✭
    @Tetchta LOL. It just occured to me the change my mind meme was your signature and not your post into this thread.
    ¤ Si vis pacem, para bellum. ¤
    Someone powerful says, "We're going to have to delete you."
    havenbanner2
    TetchtaZailaLinSibatti
  • TetchtaTetchta Member Posts: 272 ✭✭✭
    edited March 4
    Iazamat said:

    Tetchta said:

    I would argue that the fact that this conversation has been more or less productive and cordial is also evidence to this point. Although things could always be better.

    There's more I could add as evidence of needing to start from the top down, but it's not mine to share. Suffice it to say that most people haven't seen some of this in the way that a few of us have, and it's definitely not the first time it's boiled over. We may be less toxic overall, but there's definitely something festering in Aetolia.
    Sure. And honestly the responsibility for the state of the community does, in fact, largely fall on the shoulders of the staff, almost entirely. And I'm sure Aetolia's not perfect, by any means. That said, I don't think it's entirely productive to possibly frame the community in such a way that suggests that we haven't made significant progress, and the progress we have made isn't in the right direction, which I, by and large, think it is.


  • HammarHammar Training the GaidinMember Posts: 26 Immortal
    As the player of Bamathis, I’d like to clarify a point that my character has been brought up in and compared to. 

    Bamathis’ orders were to take five shrines. No more, no less. This was in the early days of taking up the mantle and it was done for a multitude of reasons; training of His order, assessment on how a major Spirit side combatant (Benedicto) would react to a challenge of that nature, evaluation of Spirit and how well they could band together to combat that threat, and, well, Strife (duh!). Oaths were taken, which is no small promise for those in His order, and it was made absolutely clear that only five were to be taken. 

    It had nothing to do with anything regarding Benedicto‘a refusal (for whatever reason) to cure another mortal. I recall no instance where a shrine was successfully defiled for that. I had a finger to the pulse so to speak, though I admit openly that I’m far from infallible. 

    Comparing Bamathis’ actions and using it as a baseline for what occurred here is not ideal. There are obvious reasons why, including the vast difference in mission statements between Bamathis and the Templar, varying ideals and goals, and the fact that Bamathis is in fact a God. The God of Strife, and He ordered five shrines taken, not forty.

    None of this is meant to construe the feelings of the administration, only my personal clarification of what occurred during that time. 


    TetchtaOonaghHawa
  • PhoeneciaPhoenecia The Merchant of Esterport Somewhere in AtticaMember Posts: 778 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Just as an aside, the Bamathis thing and the refusing to cure Estella thing were two separate incidents that happened fairly close together. 
    HammarTetchtaBenedictoCayn
  • BenedictoBenedicto Tentacles Errywhere! Member Posts: 812 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited March 4
    Phoenecia said:

    Just as an aside, the Bamathis thing and the refusing to cure Estella thing were two separate incidents that happened fairly close together. 

    Yeah, they were two completely separate incidents that fell very close to one another. I can understand the confusion.
    (Leaders): Tiur says, "I'll remember not to delete you when the time comes, Bene. Good people."

  • BenedictoBenedicto Tentacles Errywhere! Member Posts: 812 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Zaila said:

    About the Estella/guildhall invasion situation (as one of the people there when the guild hall invasion started)
    ----

    With the possible exception of those who feel ICly obligated to participate but don't genuinely enjoy it OOCly, everyone involved was having a good time with this. Estella was asked repeated by us other carnis OOCly if she was being griefed, she insisted that she was not, but that she was having a blast at being chased off with zero success. The guild hall was invaded and only those of us who attacked/defended were targeted. Estella was the only one being attacked until we came to fend off the invasion of our guildhall.
    And it was pretty hilarious, because I was somehow the "most competent carnifex combatant online" for awhile. Needless to say, the invaders got a good head-start on laying that wormhole groundwork

    Being at the invasion from start to finish, it was a good time, handled well by the invaders. Naturally, there was salt on the darkie end, people misrepresented how it went down, etc. because people aren't infallible and they were the ones being attacked, but the invaders were not being unfair.

    Estella went back to having a grand time trying to outrun Bene and co after, and I'm sure some other carnis went along with her to help in retaliation for the invasion.
    ------------
    10:10, would happily be invaded again!

    I'm hugely appreciative of this. Thank you for giving your firsthand account of it.
    (Leaders): Tiur says, "I'll remember not to delete you when the time comes, Bene. Good people."

  • HammarHammar Training the GaidinMember Posts: 26 Immortal
    At the risk of derailing, I’ve never watched OPM. But if you want to talk about the greatest show in the world, Sword Art Online, feel free to PM me!
    LinSeurimasBenedictoHawa
  • EydisEydis Member Posts: 135 ✭✭✭
    I apologize in advance if this post blows. I have a migraine but I don't want to miss out on the convo lol. Hopefully it makes sense.

    I'm glad you posted, @Iesid, because there's clearly some misunderstandings here about what healthy conflict is, this situation in general, and I think if we talk this out it would benefit the community. I'm willing to engage you on it.

    Look, I got love for Bene (you know I do, Bene <3) but I also think it's important that we hold each other accountable and have healthy conflict. The fact that Bene is pushing the Temps to engage in conflict is AWESOME (People like @Xenia who are in the order even wanted in on that). What makes this conflict seemingly unhealthy is that the leader of the guild, who shapes the experience for other people, is creating systemic problems with shadow side by not communicating effectively and squashing beef. I'll get into the finer points below.

    <blockquote class="UserQuote">
    Iesid said:

    Holy War is a terrible system, so I'm sad to see that Iosyne's Order took this route. No offense if the Creator of the system is still present on the staff, but it is fairly antiquated as far as conflict mechanisms go. It favors time and shrine density more than anything else whatsoever and it is a tedious thing to pack or unpack. Putting up shrines, etc is just a boring endeavor overall.



    No conflict mechanism is going to be perfect. Literally none. It still obviously has the function of engaging the world at large to stir roleplay and passion about organizations on life support or as you put, ‘to global effect.’ It’s so impactful these kinds of debates happen on the forums, which we rarely use. So, you know, the function of that conflict obviously speaks for itself.
    Iesid said:

    I'm not going to crucify @Benedicto for doing what he did. At least he did something with global effect, something that started potential roleplay - that's something several people complaining at him in this thread cannot claim for themselves. They're using a conversation completely irrelevant to their character to vent their frustrations at him for other purposes. Using this chance for personal attacks is pretty low. That just obfuscates the conversation at hand: how the community should carry themselves when combat gets out of hand.

    ...Phoenecia's post is primary example - not very productive and mostly just looking to take a swipe at a community member for petty reasons. Bulrok's post, when his character has no relation to Iosyne, is another one - indignant over the behavior of another player. It's like deja vu all over again when it comes to this stuff.

    So instead of thinking of it as just being “mean to Benedicto” why can’t we see the greater systemic ramifications within Aetolia at large? That seems to be the discontent here. The guild leader of the Templar guild, who shapes experiences for other players and helps shape conflict on a global scale in the game, a.) has a history of picking easy targets to beef up his reputation, b.) is not working through conflict when called out and instead blocking people while perpetuating the same problematic behaviors he’s been called out for which means behavior never gets fixed, and c.) still uses that entitlement he expects from shadow side to shape further political and conflict situations in further engagements. And we don’t have a way to work things out IC or OOC amongst ourselves without it becoming a niceness pressure cooker. Now we’re using this thread to do that.

    Here’s how we carry ourselves: we use this thread to admit the reality of the situation, what we can do in the future to have healthy conflict, and what we can do to perpetuate healthy conflict. I agree with @Haven. If we have to define healthy conflict we can do that. But we stop the back biting and bitchiness on both sides, because frankly, it’s tiring, and we move on.

    (Spinesreach): Xiuhcoatl says, "Oh man, grab the children-corn. This is gonna be good."
    AloliBenedictoDrystinTetchtaAisling
  • BorminchiaBorminchia Member Posts: 46 ✭✭✭
    edited March 4
    Tiur said:


    And by that, I mean that Aetolians will get together and have cogent discussions about behavior without the need for me to step in. For instance: I regularly find commands that do not have protection on them against FORCE abilities. Sometimes this could be a big deal. It never is. I often look up usage and find that no one has even tried, and if they did, it's bugged and people are warned off behavior by other players. Aetolians tend to understand that this is a game, and some things aren't fun for anyone. I fix the command, but I love that it's rarely a problem.

    Well this is rather insightful. To preface, my character is new but I've played Aetolia on and off for a very long time.

    I have (at least) twice had force abilities used against me in pretty negative ways. Ways that drastically diminished my enjoyment of the game, and in one case mechanically blocked me for participating in a big event for a day or so. An event that I was arguably the main leader for Shadow.

    The incident was cut and dry. I was forced to kick/attack an NPC, this got me enemied to an NPC group I was supposed to be allied with/helping, and that stopped me from participating/leading in the event for about a day, until the admin were forced to intervene so I could be mechanically unenemied from the NPC group. The person who forced the command had no defense. Literally just an "oops, my bad bro, my system made me do it". Which, why you would have "force kick x" in your system is questionable at best, and using it as a defense is pretty laughable.

    I issued, as this happened immediately after some arguably bad behavior had occurred. In fact, I believe my issue specifically stated I'd probably let it slide if the main offender hadn't just done some prior rule breaking in regards to the event. I'll let one thing slide, but not repeated offenses.

    Despite the fact that the offender pleaded guilty and said "I'll take any punishment because I know what I did is really bad", I was basically told it was no big deal. That my enjoyment and overall ability to play the game didn't matter. The player who forced the action was given a slap on the wrist. I argued that a slap on the wrist for misuse of force was a bad precedent to set, especially since the misuse of force seems to come up every so often, and as I mentioned above, was not the first time I had the force ability be used against me in a way that diminished my ability to play the game.

    So to see the producer say that the misuse of FORCE abilities is "never" a big deal is pretty disheartening. I suppose it confirms what I had already thought/known. That as a player, either because of my history or because of the tether I play on (probably both), my ability to play or enjoy the game is not as important as others.

    In the end, I suppose this wraps back around to the main concern of this thread. It's not that conflict creation is bad, it's the response to conflict creation is bad. Bulrok's concern is that, when he or his tether create conflict, the reaction is extremely negative. That he or his tether is mean or a bully for creating the conflict they create. That they should feel bad for their actions and what they do to enjoy the game.

    But when something equivalent occurs for the other tether, it's brushed off as totally fine and people are overreacting and that maybe everyone 'should take a step back' and here's some anecdotal evidence that what our side does is ok but yours isn't. This point actually ties into a previous time I was forced to kick an NPC that I reference above, which also included forum salt much like this. I'll go into detail if necessary, but I'm still playing coy about who my last character was and I'm waiting to see how long it takes before it's given away.
    Haven
  • IazamatIazamat Member Posts: 275 ✭✭✭✭
    Benedicto said:
    I'm hugely appreciative of this. Thank you for giving your firsthand account of it.
    It may not have been your intention to imply otherwise, but mine was also a firsthand account. I was present for a good portion of the raids (where people getting ripped through wormholes from their own guildhall happened and definitely upset people) and the resulting aftermath. People may have had fun, but there was definitely salt in regards to how things happened.

    And thanks, @Tiur, for setting the record straight. 
    Cayn
Sign In or Register to comment.