making raiding fair

[ibusoe]

I was thinking about raiding the other night and we face the classical catch-22.  When someone tries to raid you, it's tempting to spam flee, especially if you don't know the other player.  If you're raiding people, it's tempting to insta-kill them because you're worried that they might spam-flee.

Quite a conundrum, no?

What I propose:

I propose that when a (potential) raider enters the room with (potential) prey, then each side snaps out an emote.  Then, both sides are free to continue emoting, talk, emote running, fighting, etc., without actually using combat commands.

If it appears likely that combat will break out, I propose that it is good ettiquite to allow the person who first executed their emote to have the privilige of the first fight/flight command.  After that, players may fight/run/emote/watch their opponent at will until their is a logical conclusion to the scene, either someone escaping, someone dieing, one side gaining the upper hand or etc.

Note:  If people post criticisms below, I'll use them to improve upon this idea.

Note:  If enough people like this, I'll expand on it.

[RogueGunslinger]

This game isn't fair. Welcome to Armageddon.




Err... I have nothing to add, sorry.

[Cerelum]

I was thinking about raiding the other night and we face the classical catch-22.  When someone tries to raid you, it's tempting to spam flee, especially if you don't know the other player.  If you're raiding people, it's tempting to insta-kill them because you're worried that they might spam-flee.

Quite a conundrum, no?

What I propose:

I propose that when a (potential) raider enters the room with (potential) prey, then each side snaps out an emote.  Then, both sides are free to continue emoting, talk, emote running, fighting, etc., without actually using combat commands.

If it appears likely that combat will break out, I propose that it is good ettiquite to allow the person who first executed their emote to have the privilige of the first fight/flight command.  After that, players may fight/run/emote/watch their opponent at will until their is a logical conclusion to the scene, either someone escaping, someone dieing, one side gaining the upper hand or etc.

Note:  If people post criticisms below, I'll use them to improve upon this idea.

Note:  If enough people like this, I'll expand on it.

While I personally hate being insta-killed by anyone, I do not think that they should have to follow any rules of engagement about it.

While I think your heart is in the right place, I think you're bordering on "Do it this way cause I said so." instead of "This would improve the game."

[musashi]

What you propose could be summed up as: The Honor System.
Which doesn't seem to me to be a solution so much as a plea; if everyone just choose to "do it this way" things would be better.

... ... could be you're right, but there's no way to enforce that.

[Gunnerblaster]

You need to relax and stop telling people how to roleplay.

If you have a problem with someone's roleplay - File a complaint. It's there for a reason.

[MarshallDFX]

You need to relax and stop telling people how to roleplay.

If you have a problem with someone's roleplay - File a complaint. It's there for a reason.

Gunnerblaster emotes out of turn!  *subdue gunnerblaster*

[Gunnerblaster]

You need to relax and stop telling people how to roleplay.

If you have a problem with someone's roleplay - File a complaint. It's there for a reason.

Gunnerblaster emotes out of turn!  *subdue gunnerblaster*

*Your subdued, despite your attempts to wrestle away!*

[Wasteland Raider]

Shadows of Isildur had this. It was called "the Rules of Engagement." It was a massive, colossal failure, an annoyance, and something I would likely quit playing raider PCs over if it were ever implemented.

[Yam]

Shadows of Isildur had this. It was called "the Rules of Engagement." It was a massive, colossal failure, an annoyance, and something I would likely quit playing raider PCs over if it were ever implemented.

Heh heh heh.

[Delstro]

Raider and victim need to understand and agree on one thing.

Armageddon=interaction

If the raider and victim understand that it is more fun to interact with other characters than it is to not interact with other characters, then staying (If you are the victim) and not insta-bashing (If you are the raider.) are more fun than going through the motions.

Leave the motions for real life. Enjoy the unexpected.

[Clearsighted]

Pretty much what Rogue and Gunner said.

[HTX]

I've been suggesting this for years:

'threaten <target>'

Clearly indicates the aggressor doesn't want to attack immediately, just threaten, thereby putting both parties at ease. Also, if someone wants to flee, they can, just not in an unrealistic manner (they'll initiate combat).

An easy enough solution which I've seen solve this exact problem in several other games. Tried, tested and true.

[RogueGunslinger]

I like that solution, actually. One command, just >Threaten amos. No approach code. No massive change. Just a code that makes youa ttack when someone tries to flee.

[musashi]

As long as flee self allowed the person in qustion the chance to get away without starting combat, provided their flee skill was high enough ... I'd be all for that.

[Cerelum]

As long as flee self allowed the person in qustion the chance to get away without starting combat, provided their flee skill was high enough ... I'd be all for that.

No, cause then they would be able to run away in all situations, being surrounded, having a sword held to their chest, etc etc.

Should HAVE to enter combat THEN flee, this way it gives the attacker a chance to get a reeling blow and also gives the person being attacked a chance to rp out before spamming FLEE.

[Dresan]

I've always felt there is plenty of places for safe RP in this game. (ex taverns, cities, outposts)

Equally i've always felt there isn't enough actual killing and death in this game. Unless your a newbie, you often die when you want to die. (ex. follow X to apartment, purposely piss off noble/templar, sleep in the open in the wilds, decide not to flee after being attacked)

You need to make some powerful friends if you want to kill someone who doesn't actually want to die.

Also, having been on boths sides of good old 'charging in and two rounding someone'. I can honestly say it adds alot more to the game then people often think.

1. There is RP before the insta-kill.
2. There is RP after the insta-kill.
3. There is RP as to why someone would insta-kill someone
4. There is RP as to why someone would be in a place that allows someone else to insta-kill them.

The game is alot more enjoyable when there are places where you know you could potentially die no matter what you do. 

[musashi]

As long as flee self allowed the person in qustion the chance to get away without starting combat, provided their flee skill was high enough ... I'd be all for that.

No, cause then they would be able to run away in all situations, being surrounded, having a sword held to their chest, etc etc.

Should HAVE to enter combat THEN flee, this way it gives the attacker a chance to get a reeling blow and also gives the person being attacked a chance to rp out before spamming FLEE.

They would have a chance to get away ... based on their flee skill. If said raider is really the desert trodding combat badass you (general "you") think he is, then you should have nothing to worry about. Your offense is so high they won't pass the check anyway, right? Of course, for balance why not say that failing the flee attempt while under "threat" puts them in post-skill use delay, that way they have to weigh the options and think ... hmm, am I reallly realllllly fast enough or should I just give up my pack?

[Adieren]

To the raiders- Stop griefing! It makes me want to pick up awesome stats, train with Mr. Miyagi and come and keel you all to grief you back. There are ways to raid without ruining plotlines/characters lives/etc. Don't kill people who are desperate to live- provided they don't look/don't contact.

To those raided- You can either turn or burn. Cooperate or disintegrate. If you're fabulous, maybe they might let you live.

[Yam]

To the raiders- Stop griefing! It makes me want to pick up awesome stats, train with Mr. Miyagi and come and keel you all to grief you back. There are ways to raid without ruining plotlines/characters lives/etc. Don't kill people who are desperate to live- provided they don't look/don't contact.

To those raided- You can either turn or burn. Cooperate or disintegrate. If you're fabulous, maybe they might let you live.

There's no such thing as griefing.

[Twilight]

Outside of my experiences with Blackmoon...

If you look and act badass enough to be trouble, you are generally left alone by a raider, although not always.  If you don't, you are not, although not always.  Sometimes looks can be deceiving.

Seems a reasonable state of affairs to me.

[Sephiroto]

Since you never know when a raiding candidate will actually RP with you or not, sometimes you just lay the smack down to ensure you get something to take home to ma'.  Shoot first, RP later.  This can suck, especially if you're on the receiving end.

So, we need a way to force the chance for RP.  You would need to trap or immobilize your target.  Set an ambush to capture folks in nets using a net and a skill, or maybe one of those covered up hole in the ground things.  If you fail they can stay and RP or they can run, their choice.  If you succeed they're bound.  They can try to escape.  Odds are they won't.  You can then RP all you want.  If they don't comply then, stab them over and over and over until they do comply or die resisting.

Since using traps and nets is a pretty powerful tool similar to magick, maybe the new class of ranger/warrior/hunter that gets them would be a level 1 or 2 karma class.

Just an idea...

[Synthesis]

As long as flee self allowed the person in qustion the chance to get away without starting combat, provided their flee skill was high enough ... I'd be all for that.

No, cause then they would be able to run away in all situations, being surrounded, having a sword held to their chest, etc etc.

Should HAVE to enter combat THEN flee, this way it gives the attacker a chance to get a reeling blow and also gives the person being attacked a chance to rp out before spamming FLEE.

They would have a chance to get away ... based on their flee skill. If said raider is really the desert trodding combat badass you (general "you") think he is, then you should have nothing to worry about. Your offense is so high they won't pass the check anyway, right? Of course, for balance why not say that failing the flee attempt while under "threat" puts them in post-skill use delay, that way they have to weigh the options and think ... hmm, am I reallly realllllly fast enough or should I just give up my pack?

The problem is, 'flee' almost always passes before you actually incapacitate someone in melee, even if you're a 50+ day warrior.  The only thing you can hope for is a couple of quick, consecutive reeling blows, but you this is only reliable if you have very high (read: dwarf-range) strength and you're dual-wielding bludgeoning.

[Qzzrbl]

As long as flee self allowed the person in qustion the chance to get away without starting combat, provided their flee skill was high enough ... I'd be all for that.

No, cause then they would be able to run away in all situations, being surrounded, having a sword held to their chest, etc etc.

Should HAVE to enter combat THEN flee, this way it gives the attacker a chance to get a reeling blow and also gives the person being attacked a chance to rp out before spamming FLEE.

They would have a chance to get away ... based on their flee skill. If said raider is really the desert trodding combat badass you (general "you") think he is, then you should have nothing to worry about. Your offense is so high they won't pass the check anyway, right? Of course, for balance why not say that failing the flee attempt while under "threat" puts them in post-skill use delay, that way they have to weigh the options and think ... hmm, am I reallly realllllly fast enough or should I just give up my pack?

The problem is, 'flee' almost always passes before you actually incapacitate someone in melee, even if you're a 50+ day warrior.  The only thing you can hope for is a couple of quick, consecutive reeling blows, but you this is only reliable if you have very high (read: dwarf-range) strength and you're dual-wielding bludgeoning.

Two easy solutions to this.

Poisons.

And raiding-buddies.

[Synthesis]

Thanks, Captain Obvious. 

[Lizzie]

If it was fair, it wouldn't be raiding. It shouldn't be fair from the raider's side, and it shouldn't be fair from the victim's side. In Armageddon, it isn't fair on either side. Which means, it's working exactly as it should.