Cookies Disclaimer

I agree Our site saves small pieces of text information (cookies) on your device in order to authenticate logins, deliver better content and provide statistical analysis. You can adjust your browser settings to prevent our site from using cookies, but doing so will prevent some aspects of the site from functioning properly.

Feud Cancellation

Wyborn Cathmor
Along the lines of calling of feuds…

Both parties should be able to communicate prior to or during the feud to agree on terms of surrender. This could be concession of a piece of land, payment of commodities, etc.

Basically extortion on the settlement/company scale should absolutely be a thing.

I know a lot of folks would like this capability and some settlements may rather pay off their aggressors as opposed to going into battle.

The thing is… this can be done now. All it requires is a bit of communication between feuder and feudee.

The truth is many of the systems we desire can be accomplished with a little communication. You want to be a bandit instead of a murderer? Talk to your victim. Tell them to, "Give me all your <insert desired loot here>!" They will either acquiesce to your demands, run, or fight. Will this make your job more difficult that simply killing them? Yep, but it is more bandity and less murdery.

The problem is people do not want to give up first strike advantage… even when they are in Dwarven Banded and T2 spears and their target is in Pioneer clothes…

Now, I will also say that in a world where we have learned that Pharasma will not let us die permanently that murder would take on less stigma for the average bandit because why not kill them to take their stuff? It's quicker and easier, right?


EDIT: Quijenoth, your comment about people not wanting to pvp having a way to end feuds without fighting goes with what I was saying. They should be able to communicate with the aggressor to work out a deal for surrender. Of course if no deal can be made they should not be able to simply say, "No, you cannot feud me because I don't wanna." If no terms of surrender agreeable to both sides can be reached then whether they want to fight or not… it's going to happen.
Wyborn Cathmor of Keeper's Pass
"The first gift you ever receive is your family. We all grow from the seeds of our parents' plant."
-Parables of Erastil
Baron Malthius
Based on what I recall hearing from the last dev chat, the idea post EE10 was to extend the default feud time to 24 hours with the clear intent to give the opposing side some time to get back. I understood it as a sort of risk-reward system and while you can feud whoever you wish it was a strategic decision that had to be made.

If that is accurate, wouldn't the ability to cancel a feud midway nullify that? I don't see what good it will do to have 24 hour feuds be the default if the feud can simply be turned off a few hours into it. The only thing I could see changing as a result is higher feud costs perhaps, but from a point of view of strategic warfare that kind of eliminates a lot of depth to feud-based PvP.

If that is how the devs intend for it to work then that's their decision, though I will say I would be puzzled if that was the case.
I'm quite sure that you're right about the default 24 hour timer, and I believe that there should be some mechanic in place to stop feuds. HOWEVER I believe that there should be a wait time on it.

Company A starts 24 hour feud on Company B and cancels the feud 2 hours after the feud has started; it should not end the feud for an hour. This means if company A didn't mean to feud or worked out a "payoff" it allows it to be canceled but if company B wants to keep fighting they can then re-feud to keep the war going. I think this would be a fair mechanic to both sides, and leaves repercussions for the original action in place.
You must be logged into an enrolled account to post