Ixchilgal2008-07-02 04:59:01
Once again, fix Declare/Defend.
Once again, I have died, because I was unable to defend myself...while others were perfectly capable of attacking me.
Fix this. It is broken.
This is my idea.
Once again, I have died, because I was unable to defend myself...while others were perfectly capable of attacking me.
Fix this. It is broken.
This is my idea.
Rika2008-07-02 05:15:46
Well, for some reason Xiel and Shuyin both didn't declare and you could all hit them and none of us could defend them or anything. That's broken too.
Shiri2008-07-02 05:18:23
That fight was totally messed up (in my favour for once, so woo for that.) I sent a bug report with two of the most obvious issues, but you guys should probably chime in with whatever else happened.
Ixchilgal2008-07-02 05:23:42
QUOTE(rika @ Jul 2 2008, 01:15 AM) 527651
Well, for some reason Xiel and Shuyin both didn't declare and you could all hit them and none of us could defend them or anything. That's broken too.
Actually, I couldn't hit Xiel...I tried when he did his Bard stuff on me. What he probably saw was me casting illusions.
Rika2008-07-02 05:25:35
QUOTE(Ixchilgal @ Jul 2 2008, 05:23 PM) 527657
Actually, I couldn't hit Xiel...I tried when he did his Bard stuff on me. What he probably saw was me casting illusions.
I'm pretty sure I saw Vathael hit him a few times.
Ixchilgal2008-07-02 05:28:29
QUOTE(rika @ Jul 2 2008, 01:25 AM) 527658
I'm pretty sure I saw Vathael hit him a few times.
Vathael may have hit him, I don't know...but I know I didn't. I tried to hit him, so I could get him out of the room, and I could get out of there, but it wouldn't let me. Again.
So, again, I get jumped by a bunch of people, unable to defend myself for some inane reason...and oh look, I got PK status on people who tried to jump me, because the only way I could defend myself initially was to declare them.
Yeah. This avenger system is -gold-.
Celina2008-07-02 05:34:44
Vathael attacked Xiel. I defended Shikha and Haiden and could attack Shuyin, but no one else.
While we are fixing the Avenger...
Make avenger fire BEFORE timeslip, please.
And there needs to be a penalty for people that jump the same person repeatedly on prime but never actually get a kill. Avenger doesn't prevent griefing unless you are willing to lay down and die.
While we are fixing the Avenger...
Make avenger fire BEFORE timeslip, please.
And there needs to be a penalty for people that jump the same person repeatedly on prime but never actually get a kill. Avenger doesn't prevent griefing unless you are willing to lay down and die.
Rika2008-07-02 05:41:55
QUOTE(Celina @ Jul 2 2008, 05:34 PM) 527660
Make avenger fire BEFORE timeslip, please.
Only if we can raze timeslip with arm balance too.
Unknown2008-07-02 06:37:17
QUOTE(Celina @ Jul 1 2008, 10:34 PM) 527660
And there needs to be a penalty for people that jump the same person repeatedly on prime but never actually get a kill. Avenger doesn't prevent griefing unless you are willing to lay down and die.
I understand the concern but I am not sure this would work out well.
For the moment I will set aside how the system would programmaticly (sp?) detect someone trying to kill you over and over.
Would you just suddenly gain status after an attack once you passed a threshold? So you could in theory just keep insulting and slapping and otherwise being a pain to someone, or their loved ones, or whatever, and then once they attack you, you run, wait a bit, and then do it all over again. They would either have to just put up with your hostility or risk having the avenger kill them for their repeated attempts to kill you.
Perhaps a slightly contrived example, but I think similar things would happen all the time.
I also think the rules for how the code could detect the situation would need to be rather complex as well to allow a drawn out battle but catch multiple jumpings. I honestly am not sure if you could even clearly define things.
So perhaps not ideal, but if someone keeps attacking you on non-enemy territory prime, a single death will put a stop to it.
Celina2008-07-02 07:01:17
QUOTE(rika @ Jul 2 2008, 12:41 AM) 527661
Only if we can raze timeslip with arm balance too.
That is a totally seperate issue from avenger.
Anyways, why do you think warriors should be able to ignore both timeslip and reflections while everyone else has to deal with them? You already break shields faster than anyone other than maybe bards. What you are requesting is a bit ridiculous.
QUOTE(Enthralled @ Jul 2 2008, 01:37 AM) 527665
I understand the concern but I am not sure this would work out well.
For the moment I will set aside how the system would programmaticly (sp?) detect someone trying to kill you over and over.
Would you just suddenly gain status after an attack once you passed a threshold? So you could in theory just keep insulting and slapping and otherwise being a pain to someone, or their loved ones, or whatever, and then once they attack you, you run, wait a bit, and then do it all over again. They would either have to just put up with your hostility or risk having the avenger kill them for their repeated attempts to kill you.
Perhaps a slightly contrived example, but I think similar things would happen all the time.
I also think the rules for how the code could detect the situation would need to be rather complex as well to allow a drawn out battle but catch multiple jumpings. I honestly am not sure if you could even clearly define things.
So perhaps not ideal, but if someone keeps attacking you on non-enemy territory prime, a single death will put a stop to it.
For the moment I will set aside how the system would programmaticly (sp?) detect someone trying to kill you over and over.
Would you just suddenly gain status after an attack once you passed a threshold? So you could in theory just keep insulting and slapping and otherwise being a pain to someone, or their loved ones, or whatever, and then once they attack you, you run, wait a bit, and then do it all over again. They would either have to just put up with your hostility or risk having the avenger kill them for their repeated attempts to kill you.
Perhaps a slightly contrived example, but I think similar things would happen all the time.
I also think the rules for how the code could detect the situation would need to be rather complex as well to allow a drawn out battle but catch multiple jumpings. I honestly am not sure if you could even clearly define things.
So perhaps not ideal, but if someone keeps attacking you on non-enemy territory prime, a single death will put a stop to it.
I don't see how it'd be that hard to code. Repeatedly declaring someone in a non enemy area over a set period of time results in suspect. No, not ideal, but it's not like the declaree can abuse it if the declarer is smart about it. Someone that is harassing you, like the above example, should be issued.
What I have in mind would work like this: Say the timespan is a week...said person declares you and goes on a caution list. Said person declares you 5 times within that seven days and they are now suspect.
I'm sure some people would abuse it like everything else, but I'd rather protect the average player from griefers and deal with the isolated incidents of abuse then let things carry on like they are where you can harass someone endlessly as long as you don't kill them.
Disclaimer: I mentioned issuing someone that is harassing you, which is what should be done. I have as much faith in the issue system as I do in the Avenger system. They are both broken. Hard evidence and witnesses won't even win you issues.
Estarra2008-07-02 16:57:39
QUOTE(Ixchilgal @ Jul 1 2008, 09:59 PM) 527645
Once again, fix Declare/Defend.
Once again, I have died, because I was unable to defend myself...while others were perfectly capable of attacking me.
Fix this. It is broken.
This is my idea.
Once again, I have died, because I was unable to defend myself...while others were perfectly capable of attacking me.
Fix this. It is broken.
This is my idea.
If it is broken, we will fix it. However, we really need to know EXACTLY how to duplicate a problem in order to fix it.
Ixchilgal2008-07-03 04:59:01
QUOTE(Estarra @ Jul 2 2008, 12:57 PM) 527747
If it is broken, we will fix it. However, we really need to know EXACTLY how to duplicate a problem in order to fix it.
It's broken, because someone can force me to declare them if I want to stop them from killing me. Make it so when you defend someone, anyone who's declared that person can attack you as well.
For example, Geb jumps Kilbis. I defend Kilbis, and attack Geb. Geb should not have to seperately declare me in order to fight back - he should just be able to pound on me to his hearts content.
I have been died twice now to this, I'll fight someone, 10 people will show up defending, and I'll be unable to hit them back unless I specifically declare (which is a bit of a pain in the ass when you're busy trying to not die). I mean, admittedly, against a small army, I don't stand much chance -anyways-, but it's better to have -any- chance over none.
Some will argue that I can just declare them...but that takes time. I don't always have that time, especially when I have two or three demigods pounding on me, because a Nameless Entity who decided to help kill me by preventing me from running away using a method doesn't require them to declare me (also inane, but an arguement for a seperate time), forcing me to declare them if I wanted to get out.
On a second note, make it so that if you currently have someone declared, you can't be defended. If you choose to engage in PK, well, you take those risks...your allies can come declare as well, if they want to help you. Defend should be -purely- for those people who aren't starting the troublei n the first place.
Desitrus2008-07-03 07:30:24
Am I missing why it needs to be more complex than swinging a weapon yourself flags you for PvP? IE make forced actions not flag but anything else? Honestly. If you take a swing at somebody you are pretty much saying you want to fight.
Shaddus2008-07-03 11:38:14
Look, I still say Illusions should be an auto declare. If I am sitting in the aetherplex, and Dysolis runs in, and makes an illusion of himself attacking me, or w/e, it should auto him declaring me, and anyone else in the aetherplex.
Ronny2008-07-03 17:00:03
Shaddus. Illusions aren't targetted. If you don't lose health, don't declare. If you're not afflicted, don't declare. In other words, don't -ever- declare unless you know what you're getting yourself into.
EDIT: You never gave a scenario where the auto illusion declaring thing would be useful too.
EDIT: You never gave a scenario where the auto illusion declaring thing would be useful too.
Xenthos2008-07-03 17:07:34
QUOTE(Ronny @ Jul 3 2008, 01:00 PM) 528179
Shaddus. Illusions aren't targetted. If you don't lose health, don't declare. If you're not afflicted, don't declare. In other words, don't -ever- declare unless you know what you're getting yourself into.
EDIT: You never gave a scenario where the auto illusion declaring thing would be useful too.
EDIT: You never gave a scenario where the auto illusion declaring thing would be useful too.
*Munsia illusions annoying gibberish every few seconds*
*Since Munsia has declared due to this, you may kill Munsia*
Wouldn't that be useful?
Ronny2008-07-03 17:23:25
And every single one in the room gets suspect on her. Someone illusioning for RP declares the people in their room and ends up dying for it. It was just a bad idea to begin with.
Xenthos2008-07-03 17:25:35
QUOTE(Ronny @ Jul 3 2008, 01:23 PM) 528188
And every single one in the room gets suspect on her. Someone illusioning for RP declares the people in their room and ends up dying for it. It was just a bad idea to begin with.
What? Not if it was her declaring you because she used the illusions. She'd be the one to get suspect if she killed someone, and nobody else would.
Also, simply declaring doesn't give the suspect, you have to do an attack (participate / help in the death). Or at least, it never did in the past.
Unknown2008-07-03 17:44:45
Whats the difference between an annoying Illusion and an annoying emote? can we have just emoting anything declare everyone in the room too?
Xenthos2008-07-03 17:46:28
QUOTE(krin1 @ Jul 3 2008, 01:44 PM) 528195
Whats the difference between an annoying Illusion and an annoying emote? can we have just emoting anything declare everyone in the room too?
Illusions have a *lot* more flexibility and potential for abuse, since they aren't tagged with your name.