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.

Golgotha ... meh

Doc
If not, why would PfO be designed differently?

The question you need to ask is, why is Goblin Works designing it differently. They could have made 100% safe areas from the beginning, at some point (a year or more) you have to believe they are actively choosing not to make it a thing.
Dreaden
Elmin Sterro
Rynnik
Elmin Sterro
Dreaden
For the good of the server population and newbie retention, I suggest EBA stop recruiting players that have no interest in PvP. You can't protect them and they will get get killed. The SE is the most dangerous place in the game, newbies be warned.

It sounds like you guys might be interpreting crowdforging differently than the rest of us. The crowd should be doing the forging, rather than the crowd being forged. If a non-combatant player wants to play with a specific group of people, they should be able to do that without being told to leave or endure harassment.
No, actually that doesn't make any sense at all.

If someone joins a specific group of people who then attacks a self proclaimed 'PvP organization' they should NOT get an opt out from the resulting PvP as part of that group. That would completely strip the game of any sort of meaning or consequence.

Politics matter. If you decide to be led by political failures that should impact your day-to-day play.

I'm not disputing your reasoning for why you attack non-combatants, I fully understand that is an element of warfare. What I disagree with is the continual insistence that players should leave a group to avoid PvP. If your response to a complaint like Harads was simply "Sorry buddy, we're at war."*, it would not bother me. Instead you are saying "Hey, if you don't want to be killed, then go play with a different group of people."*, which intentionally or not sounds a lot like an attempt to bully players out of our companies, which I find to be in extremely poor taste.

*-Not actual quotes, in case that's not obvious.
We're just letting people know they don't have to be a part of the conflict if they don't want to. Sounds more like a PSA than bullying to me.
Midnight
Elmin Sterro
Rynnik
Elmin Sterro
Dreaden
For the good of the server population and newbie retention, I suggest EBA stop recruiting players that have no interest in PvP. You can't protect them and they will get get killed. The SE is the most dangerous place in the game, newbies be warned.

It sounds like you guys might be interpreting crowdforging differently than the rest of us. The crowd should be doing the forging, rather than the crowd being forged. If a non-combatant player wants to play with a specific group of people, they should be able to do that without being told to leave or endure harassment.
No, actually that doesn't make any sense at all.

If someone joins a specific group of people who then attacks a self proclaimed 'PvP organization' they should NOT get an opt out from the resulting PvP as part of that group. That would completely strip the game of any sort of meaning or consequence.

Politics matter. If you decide to be led by political failures that should impact your day-to-day play.

I'm not disputing your reasoning for why you attack non-combatants, I fully understand that is an element of warfare. What I disagree with is the continual insistence that players should leave a group to avoid PvP. If your response to a complaint like Harads was simply "Sorry buddy, we're at war."*, it would not bother me. Instead you are saying "Hey, if you don't want to be killed, then go play with a different group of people."*, which intentionally or not sounds a lot like an attempt to bully players out of our companies, which I find to be in extremely poor taste.

*-Not actual quotes, in case that's not obvious.

Your response, unintended probably, shows very little regard for over a dozen fine settlements who have done an AMAZING job at creating areas where they are free from war. Those settlements DESERVE more recruits of the uninterested-in-PvP variety, and they put in the hard work, and showed the diplomatic and personal and collective restraint that got them into their peaceful situations.

In most cases this week we even left the events sites at their old tower sites alone (though some we felt we had to do once others started feeding on them on the third day). Before I logged out Monday night (the 4th day of the event), various people from other settlements were excited to tell us about event sites they found still existing on the map, and each time a look at the old tower maps had us telling them, sorry, we won't be doing that one, for now.

Those settlements have done the hard work it takes for us to treat them with that kind of regard. They are the settlements that deserve the non-PvP-interested players that EBA's "sheepdogs" pretend to be looking out for. Those settlements are largely (though not perfectly) models of the economic and military strength, restraint, and diplomacy it takes to forge peace.

Also, someone using PvP to pressure any of the players you've tricked into the forever war (as compared to those who are happy with the forever war) might not be sending a "go somewhere else" message. In a game like this, it can also be a "you need regime change" message, or a "you need policy changes" message, or even a "it's time to discuss how much tribute you'll pay us" message. I'm not saying those are our messages (I don't speak for any settlement), just that sandbox players transmit a variety of messages, through PvP, all the time.
He who wrestles with us strengthens our nerves and sharpens our skill. Our antagonist is our helper.
-Edmund Burke
Tyv Blodvaerd of Aragon
Dreaden
We're just letting people know they don't have to be a part of the conflict if they don't want to. Sounds more like a PSA than bullying to me.

But this runs counter to the recruitment spam that the SE corner is the safest place on the map.
Aragon (CN) a settlement founded on the principles of the River Freedoms: Say What You Will; Oath Breakers Die; Walk Any Road, Float Any River; Courts are for Kings; Slavery is an Abomination; Have What You Hold.

Settlement Focus: Fighter and Rogue Training
Game Play: Escalations / Refining / Crafting / Defensive PVP
Flynn Pontis
What would your advice be to players that don't want to forced into participating in pvp? My advice would be don't stay in a known war zone. My second peace of advise don't be part of a group that is part of a known conflict, you can't be part of a group that is engaged in war and expect not to be targeted like any other member because "it isn't your play style." Association matters.

In to regards to whether it is bullying it is certainly coercive in nature but that is what war is, Golgotha is engaged in a war against the EBA and it is a war we intend to win. Feelings are going to get hurt not intentionally mind you, but that cannot be helped. Actually it scratch that it can be helped not by Golgothans but by members of the EBA specifically people who are spamming general to recruit new members. I am of the mind that the EBA is the one that is responsible for the frustration of their members (but Flynn Golgothans are the ones killing members of the EBA making them upset, are you crazy?) That's right voices in my head, the EBA is responsible for this just as responsible if not more for these feelings of frustration and here's why. Firstly they are aware of the current state of affairs yet they continue to insist that they can provide new players a safe place to play the game. As it is commonly known throughout the server the EBA is constantly being attacked by hordes of malcontent teenagers. I won't explain the reason for this as it has been explained to death in other posts. This leads to my second point which is that they are completely aware that this claim is false and instead use their players that have quit the game as martyrs in an attempt to create condemnation across the server. Just take a stroll down memory lane Golgotha fights EBA, EBA member quits, EBA calls Golgotha bullies and cheaters in forums, rinse and repeat 100 times over. I am perfectly ok with a forever war and apparently so is EBA leadership I just don't want to hear that it is Golgotha driving players out of the game anymore. So don't be another forum topic for Decius or nihimon to throw in our face, play the game in a settlement that is capable of supporting your play style.
Elmin Sterro
Rynnik
Elmin Sterro
Rynnik
Elmin Sterro
Dreaden
For the good of the server population and newbie retention, I suggest EBA stop recruiting players that have no interest in PvP. You can't protect them and they will get get killed. The SE is the most dangerous place in the game, newbies be warned.

It sounds like you guys might be interpreting crowdforging differently than the rest of us. The crowd should be doing the forging, rather than the crowd being forged. If a non-combatant player wants to play with a specific group of people, they should be able to do that without being told to leave or endure harassment.
No, actually that doesn't make any sense at all.

If someone joins a specific group of people who then attacks a self proclaimed 'PvP organization' they should NOT get an opt out from the resulting PvP as part of that group. That would completely strip the game of any sort of meaning or consequence.

Politics matter. If you decide to be led by political failures that should impact your day-to-day play.

I'm not disputing your reasoning for why you attack non-combatants, I fully understand that is an element of warfare. What I disagree with is the continual insistence that players should leave a group to avoid PvP. If your response to a complaint like Harads was simply "Sorry buddy, we're at war."*, it would not bother me. Instead you are saying "Hey, if you don't want to be killed, then go play with a different group of people."*, which intentionally or not sounds a lot like an attempt to bully players out of our companies, which I find to be in extremely poor taste.

*-Not actual quotes, in case that's not obvious.
I've done that whole 'Sorry buddy, we're at war.' thing a lot in the past, but I felt like it was best to stop bothering.

Why?

Because of repeated statements from your leadership that they won't ever trust an agreement with us and have no intention of seeking a diplomatic resolution - someone will burn before they sit at a table with us evil landrush cheaters and that seems to be the stance they want.

If this is the case it actually seems pretty nasty TO ME to do the ol' "suck it up buttercup" of sorry we are at war. We jokingly call this the forever war for good reason as that seems to be exactly what Nihimon and Decius want. As far as that leaves me I actually think it is much nicer for me to say, 'mate, you really should go find a new home if this conflict isn't fun for you, because it is fun for me and from what I can tell it isn't ending any time soon'.

I don't see how the cause for war is at all relevant to what I said, but noted.

It might be nicer to say that. However, in the context of this kind of problem where someone has an intense reaction to in game hostility, a follow up of several people insisting that he join a new settlement looks and may feel like coercion.
Bringslite
Why is Goblin Works designing it differently?

1. I suppose that I am alright with it, personally, because I know that it is a two way street. It is my personal choice not to drive on that street. Yet I represent more than just myself, or at least I feel that I do. It isn't a popular feature with a large portion of existing players or new ones. I am not sure whether GW is concerned about that part, but they probably should be.

2. You can make an agreement with whomever you think will honor such things and the Free Highlanders have done that. It won't keep out all the PK happy people though. We don't mind PVP so much (caveat: 23/7 PVP? No thanks) as it is a great thrill. It is pretty much the ONLY unpredictable thing we (PfO) have available. Human opponents are much more fun.

PfO needs to grow. New and vet players need to HAVE FUN when they play or they won't stay and they will drop their subscriptions. Being ganked in your new settlement at the bank or crafting stations isn't fun for an alarmingly large % of people. Many are ok with PVP (or at least trying it). Not all are ok with craftstation ganking, whether it happens to them or having to do that to others. I think they realize that reciprocating won't make it stop. It will just make the game devolve from innocents-vs.-wolves-vs.-guard dogs to wolves-vs.-guard dogs and finally to just wolves-vs.-wolves. <– That is the end result in most literally "wide open" PVP sandboxes. It hasn't helped them much (in general). EVE is doing alright (I think), but EVE has some places safe from PVP. It has options for other play styles like crafting.

As I have said before, even if it is just the Thornguards reacting, it is better than "Free Kill" time, all the time. Activate the Thornguards to protect the people that reside in settlements. Empower the Thornguards to the point that in a 1 vs. 1, smart bets are on the Thornguards.

This isn't about shackling the PVP, or about spite. It is about GROWING the population, in all aspects of the interesting play available.

Lastly, defenders should have an edge. Nothing bad about an edge being lost if they are outsmarted and/or outnumbered. Right now neither of those things are needed to disadvantage defenders. That needs to be looked at.
Virtute et Armis
-Unknown
Dreamslinger
Flynn Pontis
What would your advice be to players that don't want to forced into participating in pvp? My advice would be don't stay in a known war zone. My second peace of advise don't be part of a group that is part of a known conflict, you can't be part of a group that is engaged in war and expect not to be targeted like any other member because "it isn't your play style." Association matters.

This is relevant to the discussion.
Rynnik
Elmin Sterro
Rynnik
Elmin Sterro
Rynnik
Elmin Sterro
Dreaden
For the good of the server population and newbie retention, I suggest EBA stop recruiting players that have no interest in PvP. You can't protect them and they will get get killed. The SE is the most dangerous place in the game, newbies be warned.

It sounds like you guys might be interpreting crowdforging differently than the rest of us. The crowd should be doing the forging, rather than the crowd being forged. If a non-combatant player wants to play with a specific group of people, they should be able to do that without being told to leave or endure harassment.
No, actually that doesn't make any sense at all.

If someone joins a specific group of people who then attacks a self proclaimed 'PvP organization' they should NOT get an opt out from the resulting PvP as part of that group. That would completely strip the game of any sort of meaning or consequence.

Politics matter. If you decide to be led by political failures that should impact your day-to-day play.

I'm not disputing your reasoning for why you attack non-combatants, I fully understand that is an element of warfare. What I disagree with is the continual insistence that players should leave a group to avoid PvP. If your response to a complaint like Harads was simply "Sorry buddy, we're at war."*, it would not bother me. Instead you are saying "Hey, if you don't want to be killed, then go play with a different group of people."*, which intentionally or not sounds a lot like an attempt to bully players out of our companies, which I find to be in extremely poor taste.

*-Not actual quotes, in case that's not obvious.
I've done that whole 'Sorry buddy, we're at war.' thing a lot in the past, but I felt like it was best to stop bothering.

Why?

Because of repeated statements from your leadership that they won't ever trust an agreement with us and have no intention of seeking a diplomatic resolution - someone will burn before they sit at a table with us evil landrush cheaters and that seems to be the stance they want.

If this is the case it actually seems pretty nasty TO ME to do the ol' "suck it up buttercup" of sorry we are at war. We jokingly call this the forever war for good reason as that seems to be exactly what Nihimon and Decius want. As far as that leaves me I actually think it is much nicer for me to say, 'mate, you really should go find a new home if this conflict isn't fun for you, because it is fun for me and from what I can tell it isn't ending any time soon'.

I don't see how the cause for war is at all relevant to what I said, but noted.

It might be nicer to say that. However, in the context of this kind of problem where someone has an intense reaction to in game hostility, a follow up of several people insisting that he join a new settlement looks and may feel like coercion.
I suspect that mindset could just as easily be extrapolated to where NOTHING I say would be interpreted as anything but threats and coercion despite any phrasing or intent on my end.

That doesn't change it from being really logical advice regardless of the feelings it may invoke.

Bringslite
Being ganked in your new settlement at the bank or crafting stations isn't fun for an alarmingly large % of people. Many are ok with PVP (or at least trying it). Not all are ok with craftstation ganking, whether it happens to them or having to do that to others. I think they realize that reciprocating won't make it stop. It will just make the game devolve from innocents-vs.-wolves-vs.-guard dogs to wolves-vs.-guard dogs and finally to just wolves-vs.-wolves. <– That is the end result in most literally "wide open" PVP sandboxes.
Are you differentiating between a state of in-game (and at this point semi-mechanical) war or not?

Because to me there are very different expectations there. As Dancey says,"All is fair in war. And war is hell."
Not a member, representative, or supporter of Brighthaven Alliance.
Doc
@Bringslite

New and vet players need to HAVE FUN when they play or they won't stay and they will drop their subscriptions. Being ganked in your new settlement at the bank or crafting stations isn't fun for an alarmingly large % of people.

My point is, maybe instead of continuously trying to get every single player to abide by unenforceable rules that maybe some of the new players don't know of, or which are breached by veteran players on both sides -

- Perhaps you should ask Goblin Works to make it impossible to kill people in settlements.

If Goblin Works refuses to do so, ask them why.

Or ask them why they purposefully made Thornguards not do anything during a feud.

I think I know the reasons why, but it may do well for the community for GW to iterate them publicly.

You say it will help grow the game if people don't play in certain ways so as to not frustrate others, but if these conventions are going to stay in place perpetually, when the "kids gloves" are "allowed" to come off, those same people will likely still be vulnerable to the frustration. What is gained? They quit six months later down the line?

What really needs to happen is for Goblin Works to once and for all describe in utter detail what kind of game this is supposed to be, and describe what kind of player they want it to appeal to. Then we can all decide if that is the kind of game we want to play and stay or leave accordingly. Instead of a bunch of people all wanting different things trying to get their desires crammed into a single context.
 
You must be logged into an enrolled account to post