Complaints Department

[Ashrabia]

What I'm proposing, is that as a player base, Elysium and Golgonath should declare what villages RP wise they should stay out of politically and only be in there if they're slaying the villagers.

I agree with this completely. Let me explain. What I would suggest in an 'ideal' Akanbar is that Baresh, Lymr, and Grebnarsh would be 'allied' through standard politics behavior. Trading comms and completing quests in those villages. Welsbury could be added to this as well due to the reason stated in your above post. Though, this village, in my opinion should be one of significant contestment.

Now. I should say this. I don't mind that Golgonath is fighting for politics. It is designed to do so. From a roleplay stand point it just doesn't make too much sense with Khazir. But that is what ever. However, the fact that all of the 'Golgonath' allies are on the farthest east portion of the world makes it virtually impossible for Elysium to rationally try and free those villages of Golgonath's domination. Any military strategist would agree that Elysium would take a substantial lose.

Now, i also didn't know you could only occupy 5 villages. With that in mind, why wouldn't you as Golgonath strive to make those villages that you know would not be in contestment with Elysium 'allied' and then occupy villages like Khazir. I feel you'd see much more drama with armies the closer you get to Central Crossroads. Don't we want drama after all?

There is so much to look into and address though, so although I like this idea, I think it would be impractical for the whole of Akanbar to accept anything purposed. It is easier for Golgonath to have the guaranteed villages that Elysium would have to risk an arm and a leg to to free and with things as they are, Golgonath has no fear of Elysium ever occupying a village (something i disagree with, liberation/reform should be something Elysium should be doing especially with villages we are actually at war with)). Then not to mention, Ysallyra is a factor that hasn't been addressed which could mean those 3 villages might not always be in Golgontah alliance. With that said, any elysium army would have to currently march into a choke hold area and hopefully free villages only to be killed from behind from a much larger force.

Now, I say this not knowing at all what your Diplomacy is at and fully aware that diplomacy can be changed to fit the needs of any city. However, I'd purpose that occupations only be allowed on villages that city is actually at war with. It would make sense right? If we lived in that world, Elysium could be stretching its forces to the east and Golgonath to the west. Constantly at odds with each other as one city liberates the other's villages. It might just be me, but i think that was how it was originally designed. The dwarves are obviously at war with you guys... I'd think Marinford due to valesta and what that village stands for... but i don't know.

I would then think that the Burning of Khazir would justify war between the Golgonath and Khazir... However, this will be countered by the many above comments how 30 years, changes in leadership.... yadda yadda.

Just some food for thought. Also, I personally feel that Elysium should be liberating all villages. This should include Forloch and the village that used to exist as Bugia. However, Elysium is in no way capable of waging a two way war. Like I said, there is so much to think about, so many factors... It'd almost be impossible. but hey, as Players we can come together and make this happen. I am game.

[Joscelin]

Everybody has been stealing from each other during raids? I'm disappointed. There were rules against that, and I've seen people who were forced to return stolen objects to opposing parties in the past. If an individual raids and takes an opponent's weapon, they're suppose to return it after the raid is done. There is a very fine line between causing drama in a roleplay environment, and crossing that line to griefing players oocly in-game. I'm not perfect, and I make mistakes. However, I do try to clarify them with the Divine and I do make the effort to apologize to those I've wronged so that I don't make that same mistake of stepping over the line. I may have in-game enemies, but they're all still human beings with feelings behind a computer screen.

And I agree with your last statement Ashrabia. I've always wanted to free Forloch, even as a Ysallyran. It felt morally wrong, at least to me, to keep Forloch occupied and have my same citizens kill the villagers in there repeatedly. I thought to myself, by logic isn't Forloch suppose to cry in outrage and declare war on Ysallyra? Doing whatever they can to force out the occupied armies in their home? But meh! It's game mechanics vs. roleplay in that circumstance.

[Malic]

Just a note to the burning of Khazir, I too was one of the "saviours" of the village. Seems to me that with David and myself in Golgonath now, Khazir would be only too happy to trade and deal with us.

Someone also mentioned the values of Golgonath. I'll give you my view to them. Golgonath does whatever benefits the Empire, good or evil. Given a choice in the matter we'll pick evil, such is the case with Domhan and his treasure, we could kill the basilik and kindly help him, but murdering him and taking his treasure by force suits our purposes better.
While we may be inherently evil, that doesn't mean we're always obvious about it. Many of the greatest evil regimes had their Ministry of Propoganda working full time, doing evil work but putting a spin on it. This is the way I see the village politics, we know we're evil, but if by word and deed we can convince villages that we aren't, then why shouldn't we benefit.

[Ashrabia]

New Complaint: (not sure if this should be placed into the Idea thread)

I have experienced this problem in almost every city that I have been in except for Ysallyra (because they never get raided). However, when I march the guards/wardens from the barracks or from the towers to a new position, the enemy is able to too easily deal with them. And I mean 'deal' with them by coming in and either circling, being summoned, or purposefully dying so the guards will lose their target and disperse to their original posted guard location.

Also added to the problem above is how after a certain amount of time, the guards will automatically return for no obvious reason.

Now, my complaint is this. If I am standing in the location and obviously meaning to defend, Why are the guards so easily distracted by such techniques? My intent is for them to guard against all the immediate threats, not the 1. In my opinion, it completely undermines the ability to march guards and use them in defending a raid. Now, I do understand that this is by design. I imagine that the guards must have a auto return feature so that they don't get stuck or a absentminded Captain leaving all 10 in one location. But why do they lose their target?

The easiest fix is to allow 10-15 guards to be ordered to guard any 1 location in the towers. This way it changes their old guard location, it is then the Captain's responsibility to change the guard locations back once the raid is finished. However, if the raid is successful and all guards/wardens killed, it'd be unpractical to assume that a Captain has to return when they respawn. I just feel that the system is being abused. So, maybe a temporary command that you could order them. "Order Guard Defend" could mean that the guard/wardens won't leave for 1 hour. This would be sufficient time of a Raid in almost any scenario.

[Dimetrius]

What?

That is seriously the stupidest thing I've ever heard. There's a reason they implemented a cap of 10 guards per tower, and 5 per room.

[David]

Agreed.....do we seriously want no conflict at all? It isn't easy to do....if it was easy to do, then you would be raiding.....oh wait.

Defending a raid as a Captain is the easiest thing to do in the realm, just get better bro.

I also always thought that you weren't even allowed to have ten npcs in a location at a single time, let alone marching all ten at the same. Also, I was told forever ago, that npcs are not meant to be used offensively and when they are marched into a group of enemies they are not supposed to attack. Not sure what happened to that though as they all march in and gang up on one random person.

[Joscelin]

Harassing other players is not a form of conflict. Being a total jerk is not a form of roleplay. (Not acusing anyone) >_> When things get heavy and OOC, I think it would be best to take a step back and take a deep breath.

I'm fine with pvp conflicts such as raiding, caravan looting, and army marching. The rules are clear there. But I would never take advantage of PK rules in bashing areas by going around harassing other players believing that there are no consequences to those actions. The rules clearly state that you can't bully and harass players. It's not the right kind of mature roleplay or conflict desired by other players.

[Ashrabia]

Any type of marching through icewalls.....whether it be armies or guard/warden npcs....just erks me.

I wonder if you'd have a problem with the use of the Pyromancer "snake' ability, through ice walls?

[David]

I wonder if you'd have a problem with the use of the Pyromancer "snake' ability, through ice walls?

I would if it was possible, this got changed forever ago. Though I am sure Pyromancers would like that ability back, just like how tumble is able to go through icewalls again.

[Ashrabia]

I would if it was possible, this got changed forever ago. Though I am sure Pyromancers would like that ability back, just like how tumble is able to go through icewalls again.

I guess I am wrong on this, but I feel as though I and members of my party have been snaked through Ice walls countless times. I guess I will keep a more keen eye out for such things.

[Pyrok]

Being able to send a fire snake through an ice wall actually makes sense to me... its a snake... made of pure (hell)fire.
An icewall wouldn't even slow it down.

[Chyren]

Your body smacking against the icewall would certainly complicate things.

[Pyrok]

Your body smacking against the icewall would certainly complicate things.

So we'd hear a meaty thud on the other side of the icewall? How's that a bad thing?

[Ashrabia]

Being able to send a fire snake through an ice wall actually makes sense to me... its a snake... made of pure (hell)fire.
An icewall wouldn't even slow it down.

I agree with this IF the icewall in turn melted completely due to the extreme (hell)fire.

Your body smacking against the icewall would certainly complicate things.

This is my perspective as well.

[Joscelin]

So, I've been away from Akanbar for a little bit, and I've come to realize that I think it's time for another break from the game. From my most experience in playing the game, the player base has been generally disappointing. It's not at the level of maturity one would expect from a community, especially a small one. Being harassed and seeing players (from all factions) harassing each other on the out-of-character level was just an unsettling experience for me. So bad that it left a pretty horrible aftertaste after every session. It's been fun and the game had such great potential after the changes it underwent, but I don't think it's worth the drama put up by the players. I wish there was a better solution to resolving the issue with the behaviors of the players (won't give out names), and I know that if this continues. It will drive out the newer players eventually. And this always has been an issue I have had with Akanbar in the past as well. So... without further adieu. I'm taking a step back. Later guys.