As you all know, I don't do PvP and I am dismayed at what it does to the game.... namely create threads like this. But the complaining here seems contradictory and ingenuous. With all the focus on RP excusing bad behavior, isn't that what the faction war is all about ? To completely dominate / eliminate the other faction. If it's OK to kill the other faction in PR .... even a neutral non PvP player in PR, in the name of Role Play, then why would it not be completely in the vein of RP and the lore to wipe the other faction from the face of the planet ? Of course peeking around from the RP veil, that doesn't fare well for the game as who is there left to fight ? So yes, it's not good for the game, but neither is killing peeps that have no interest in PvP simply because they '"dared" to enter PR.
So while domination is not good for the game, it is perfectly in line with the RP. How does the RP mantra which serves as the excuse for so much bad behavior, get so easily set aside when it doesn't benefit one side's interests. On Ari, we reached a point where balance was actively promoted. We had "community OPs" which both factions contributed to to distribute OP produce to all guilds. The more powerful faction would attack OPs, win them, and then give them back two weeks later. There were neutral guilds that "promoted balance" with a KLIKHx2 philosophy (Kami Lands in Kami Hands / Kara Lands in Kara Hands). None of that is permissible here "in the name of Role Play". If a Faction A Guild chooses to show up and defend a Faction B Guild say from a Marauder attack, Faction B will walk away..... all in the name of Role Play.
I agree, "greed' seems to be a primary motivator for **some** members of both factions, and certainly no less so for those with the disadvantage as those with the advantage. What is more disappointing, and this is new in the rootball in my experience, is that it is now less about having "the goodies" and more about "keeping the goodies" away from the other guys.
Most peeps who enjoy competition work from a mantra "to be the best, you gotta beat the best". If you are beating the other side because it's not a fair fight because you have access to gear that the other side doesn't, it's really not something to beat ya chest about.
As for the punishment issue, as someone who doesn't get involved in OP battles, looking from the outside repeatedly attacking an OP with no change in the result, I can view it in no other way but harrassment. Yes, I know what the CoC says:
"When declaring war on one or several OP at a time, if you don't attend at least one of these attacks with a number of players reasonably sufficient to pass the threshold against the NPC defense squadrons alone, it is considered harassment."
But really what is the point ? If you made an attack and came up just short of the threshold, by all means come back and try again. But if you failed miserably in the last attack and then declare again against the same OP with the same cast of characters, how much fun is it for the peeps who came to defend facing no challenge / enjoyment whatsoever. Let's be honest .... the only fun to be had there is annoying the other side who are taken away from more interesting and / or challenging endeavors that they would like to have pursued instead.
If attacking the OP in the 1st place is good role play, then how is responding and attacking the attacker not role play ? Whether a behavior is good or bad, should not depend on what side you're on. The Role Play hat is not something that can be taken on and off only when it fits one side of the argument. Personally, I'd like to see that hat burned. While I have no objection to RP, using it as a veil for self interest and disrespectful behavior is something I find disingenuous.
So while domination is not good for the game, it is perfectly in line with the RP. How does the RP mantra which serves as the excuse for so much bad behavior, get so easily set aside when it doesn't benefit one side's interests. On Ari, we reached a point where balance was actively promoted. We had "community OPs" which both factions contributed to to distribute OP produce to all guilds. The more powerful faction would attack OPs, win them, and then give them back two weeks later. There were neutral guilds that "promoted balance" with a KLIKHx2 philosophy (Kami Lands in Kami Hands / Kara Lands in Kara Hands). None of that is permissible here "in the name of Role Play". If a Faction A Guild chooses to show up and defend a Faction B Guild say from a Marauder attack, Faction B will walk away..... all in the name of Role Play.
I agree, "greed' seems to be a primary motivator for **some** members of both factions, and certainly no less so for those with the disadvantage as those with the advantage. What is more disappointing, and this is new in the rootball in my experience, is that it is now less about having "the goodies" and more about "keeping the goodies" away from the other guys.
Most peeps who enjoy competition work from a mantra "to be the best, you gotta beat the best". If you are beating the other side because it's not a fair fight because you have access to gear that the other side doesn't, it's really not something to beat ya chest about.
As for the punishment issue, as someone who doesn't get involved in OP battles, looking from the outside repeatedly attacking an OP with no change in the result, I can view it in no other way but harrassment. Yes, I know what the CoC says:
"When declaring war on one or several OP at a time, if you don't attend at least one of these attacks with a number of players reasonably sufficient to pass the threshold against the NPC defense squadrons alone, it is considered harassment."
But really what is the point ? If you made an attack and came up just short of the threshold, by all means come back and try again. But if you failed miserably in the last attack and then declare again against the same OP with the same cast of characters, how much fun is it for the peeps who came to defend facing no challenge / enjoyment whatsoever. Let's be honest .... the only fun to be had there is annoying the other side who are taken away from more interesting and / or challenging endeavors that they would like to have pursued instead.
If attacking the OP in the 1st place is good role play, then how is responding and attacking the attacker not role play ? Whether a behavior is good or bad, should not depend on what side you're on. The Role Play hat is not something that can be taken on and off only when it fits one side of the argument. Personally, I'd like to see that hat burned. While I have no objection to RP, using it as a veil for self interest and disrespectful behavior is something I find disingenuous.
---