Yes, I know, these discussions seem to crop up like clockwork! But, even so, I'd like to have another civilized discussion (no flames, snarky comments, sarcasm, etc.) on whether we need to look into mechanisms to curb excessive raiding. Looking at the numbers, I do believe there is enough evidence (for me) to infer that the recent raids (i.e., relentless, ongoing, multi-hour long 24/7 raids) has been harmful for Lusternia as a whole insofar as there is a decrease in player activity. We cannot survive without a strong and growing playerbase! Therefore, causes of downtrends must be analyzed and solutions considered. While I appreciate that some players want MORE mechanisms for conflict (as I've read in other threads), that's not the focus here. I'd like to focus on whether we need mechanisms to curb certain individuals who decide, for whatever reason, to focus relentlessly on raiding one organization. And if we do think this is necessary, what could those mechanisms be?

I had a suggestion, but I think I'll keep it to myself on second thought

You look to curb raiding, (ie griefing), but then introduce artifacts like the mirror which is tailor made for griefers to snipe newbs?

Concerns of griefing seem to only matter when it affects the IRE bottom line.

My suggestion would have gotten me forumbanned again, is why I didn't suggest it. So I'm using that post as a placeholder in case I think of an actual suggestion

We did not introduce artifacts because we thought they were tailor made for griefers. If you are going to be insulting and unhelpful, don't post in this thread. Also, I am insulted if you think we're concerned only because of the "bottom line" (i.e., I assume you mean money). That's not how I work.

wait, how does the genderbender mirror promote griefing?

he's talking about the scrying mirror

there's a scrying mirror? how is that a griefing tool when four different guilds and anyone with jewelry money can scry?

I think there are only a few people at any given time who are relentless in making other players miserable. I know it's not a mechanical solution, and I think I remember reading that it's been done before, but pulling those players aside and telling them to tone it down a little goes a long way.

It's not just scry. I don't remember the exact details and I'm not in a position to check, but I believe it shows everyone on all planes when you type a WHO-esque command, not including those with gems of cloaking.

Aside from the scrying artifact, is there any more constructive feedback?

You may not have introduced them purely for griefing means, but that's what they're used for.

You want my honest opinion? Raids here are tame. Ridiculously tame. Most of the raids I've been a part have had a purpose, where people get in and then they get out. Maybe it's because I'm used to Achaea where people would start raiding at 3AM my time and still be in the city when I wake up at 10, or where most raids last for hours at a time. Perhaps my opinion is skewed. However, there aren't very many raids that last longer than an hour. The worst I can think of can't even be qualified as raids, like the hit and runners that keep a group of defenders standing in their defendable for hours on the off chance that they'll come back.

Regardless, what's going to happen if you 'curb' these raids for prime/ethereal/cosmic locations for cities? Then people will just stay in a somewhat neutral area but still one close enough to matter and have an effect on the city they're aimed at. Fact is, you have parts of the playerbase that only play to take a dump on an org they dislike, and they're going to find a way to do it no matter what you do. Generalized changes aren't going to do anything, because those people are still going to be around.

I'm not fond that the only solution is "pulling players aside". This means someone has to subjectively decide who is a "griefer" which leads to potential claims of favoritism and possible lists of "precedents" which could quickly get out of hand. If there is a problem, and it does seem to come up again and again, I'd prefer if we could find a fair mechanism to help regulate raiding.

I think raiding is defined here as "killing org denizens, coercing the org to defend whether or not it interferes with what the players want to do in the game", not ganking players in neutral off-prime territory (something I agree should be looked at, maybe extend Avechna's range to Faethorn and some other places, but that's outside the scope here).

I think the biggest thing we could do to curb raiding is reduce the imperative to defend, and reduce the benefits from raiding, from an RP and mechanical standpoint. Nobody wants to spend hours resurrecting their Avatars/Demonlords/Supernals, just because the org with the bigger zerg some night decided to have some fun. *shudders at re-pacting in my Nihilist days* Others might disagree, but I really feel like village revolts and wildnodes and other large-scale, scripted battles are where combat really shines in this game, and raids have just been a necessary evil, dictated by whoever currently has a player advantage and RP excuse (the latter of which has really broken down over the years, with alliances and enemies shifting more quickly than an Orwell novel).

In short, you could ask how much of the playerbase would prefer if the Avatars, Demon Lords, Supernals, Ladies, etc. just respawned like other mobs (Tide Lords and Aspects, for instance), and if some players want to be Big Damn Heroes, they're more than welcome to defend if they want, but not be forced to out of fear of letting their org down.

I was actually just thinking earlier, that maybe there could be a nature ability, similar to Guard, that would work on moonhart/ravenwood trees. It would cost power, and only last a short time, maybe an hour, and would strengthen the sapling/mature tree against chopping, causing it to need twice as many chops to take it out.

I don't know if this is what you are looking for, but it was something that had come to mind.

Fair enough. Maybe it's true that raids in Lusternia are tame! If so, we certainly don't need to entertain any mechanisms to curb them, though that leaves me wondering why player usage is down.

While there are those who play just to "take a dump" (what a vivid phrase) on orgs they dislike, I think there could still be general changes that may help dilute the intensity in which they can ... dump.

Legitimate conflict looks exactly the same as senseless bastardry when it's running through the code.

Schools on a quarter system are at term end, and schools on a semester system are starting up term projects right now. Activity is down compared to a month ago, but is it down compared to a year ago?

Sure, we can discuss this sort of thing, especially if there's an issue with orgs taking out trees as a means of overtly griefing another org. I'm not too crazy about a nature ability--I'd be more keen on an ability where communes have to pay power to protect trees.

Believe me, it has nothing to do with school terms! (Year-over-year, we're usually up now compared to summers.) Anyway, I always keep an eye on usage and activity levels and am pretty confident in my ability to relate it to in-game events as compared to seasonal events.