Alignment Issue - Cities/Hamlets

[Sushibandit]

So the new alignment changes will certainly help the general douchebaggery in noob areas, no questions about that.

It's incredibly annoying to those clans/alliances that own Cities or Hamlets however.

Say a clan has a few red guys, they are PKers because they want to be. Your clan has a city or hamlet so it's not a big deal. Now some random unclanned idiot comes along and tries to kill the red guys. The non-red members of the clan are unable to help their chaos clanmates due to the new changes in alignment.

Here's my idea. It's quite feasible, as the game is well aware of who is doing what in a city (system channel spam, anyone?).

When someone who is not a member of the owning clan/their allies enter the grounds of a city/hamlet, change that person to rogue for the duration of their stay on the city/hamlet grounds, plus 10sec. Not chaos, just rogue. This allows the owning clan to deal with (or ignore) non clan or ally members without changing the stupid alignment system anymore.

Before the arguing begins, I would like to point out that nobody other than the owning clan/allies has any business being in a clan city/hamlet. My idea would allow the owning clan/alliance to deal with visitors as they see fit, without having to bother with alignment issues. This does not break the game for people in noob areas or NPC cities, nor does it alter the current alignment mechanics.

Discuss.

[DamunBM]

Agreed. It is very annoying to kill trespassers now!

[Snog]

Disagree, there are plenty of ways around the alignment system. E.G. do not deliver the killing blow and do not gank, cause them to go grey, etc.

[paxprobellum]

Disagree, there are plenty of ways around the alignment system. E.G. do not deliver the killing blow and do not gank, cause them to go grey, etc.

Exactly. Plus why do you care if you go red or not? You're apparently hanging out at your clan's city anyway. If you need to go to racial city, go farm some alignment. Apparently all you'll need is one kill! :P

[journey01]

So the new alignment changes will certainly help the general douchebaggery in noob areas, no questions about that.

It's incredibly annoying to those clans/alliances that own Cities or Hamlets however.

Say a clan has a few red guys, they are PKers because they want to be. Your clan has a city or hamlet so it's not a big deal. Now some random unclanned idiot comes along and tries to kill the red guys. The non-red members of the clan are unable to help their chaos clanmates due to the new changes in alignment.

Here's my idea. It's quite feasible, as the game is well aware of who is doing what in a city (system channel spam, anyone?).

When someone who is not a member of the owning clan/their allies enter the grounds of a city/hamlet, change that person to rogue for the duration of their stay on the city/hamlet grounds, plus 10sec. Not chaos, just rogue. This allows the owning clan to deal with (or ignore) non clan or ally members without changing the stupid alignment system anymore.

Before the arguing begins, I would like to point out that nobody other than the owning clan/allies has any business being in a clan city/hamlet. My idea would allow the owning clan/alliance to deal with visitors as they see fit, without having to bother with alignment issues. This does not break the game for people in noob areas or NPC cities, nor does it alter the current alignment mechanics.

Discuss.

Couldn't you just kill the guy, and even if you turn red, you can farm your clanmates until you are back to blue status?

[Froed]

Before the arguing begins, I would like to point out that nobody other than the owning clan/allies has any business being in a clan city/hamlet. My idea would allow the owning clan/alliance to deal with visitors as they see fit, without having to bother with alignment issues. This does not break the game for people in noob areas or NPC cities, nor does it alter the current alignment mechanics.

Discuss.

I disagree on what you "point out." Player cities should NOT be clan hideaways. They should be robust locations of community and trade, of course depending on what the clan wants.

My suggestion here would be no alignment +/- in clan cities. The clan could kill with impunity if they so wished, but that reputation would stop friendly travelers from visiting. Further, foreign players should be able to bind at any clanstone (a limited number) but the owning clan can set a price (limited to 0g - 100g or somesuch) which can be collected by an officer.

[Aramir]

Allowing killing anyone because they are in your city can be too easly exploited. But clan cities should have control who can enter their city:
- allow clan to configure settings on gates and guard towers (when they build them that is):
**if default city access is "allowed" - everyone on clan "enemies" list are shot by tower and they are rogue when tresspass at city - neutral and friends can enter city without problem
**if default access is "restricted" - only people with friendly status with clan can access city
**if default access is "private" - only clan members and clan alliance can access city - everyone else is shot and have rogue status when trespassing
- untill city doesnt have walls and gate everyone can tresspass city without being shot (if walls got too high requirements put some wooden barricade at very low requirements - like bank + clan vault + 1 or 2 houses - barricade can be built even on hamlets without high stone walls - barricade marks city area, so anyone knows where city begins)
- if someone is at city and has been added to enemies list or removed from allowed list he gets 2 mins warning to leave city - after this time he is shot down
- if someone enters city he doesnt have access to he gets 30 seconds warning to leave city area - after this time he is rogue and is shot
- only people with city access can use city services - like bank or vendors

[Alendera]

Allowing killing anyone because they are in your city can be too easly exploited. But clan cities should have control who can enter their city:
- allow clan to configure settings on gates and guard towers (when they build them that is):
**if default city access is "allowed" - everyone on clan "enemies" list are shot by tower

what? no. no towers in clan cities EVER.

[Daimyo]

So the new alignment changes will certainly help the general douchebaggery in noob areas, no questions about that.

It's incredibly annoying to those clans/alliances that own Cities or Hamlets however.

Say a clan has a few red guys, they are PKers because they want to be. Your clan has a city or hamlet so it's not a big deal. Now some random unclanned idiot comes along and tries to kill the red guys. The non-red members of the clan are unable to help their chaos clanmates due to the new changes in alignment.

Here's my idea. It's quite feasible, as the game is well aware of who is doing what in a city (system channel spam, anyone?).

When someone who is not a member of the owning clan/their allies enter the grounds of a city/hamlet, change that person to rogue for the duration of their stay on the city/hamlet grounds, plus 10sec. Not chaos, just rogue. This allows the owning clan to deal with (or ignore) non clan or ally members without changing the stupid alignment system anymore.

Before the arguing begins, I would like to point out that nobody other than the owning clan/allies has any business being in a clan city/hamlet. My idea would allow the owning clan/alliance to deal with visitors as they see fit, without having to bother with alignment issues. This does not break the game for people in noob areas or NPC cities, nor does it alter the current alignment mechanics.

Discuss.

Totally disagree.. #1 there are 4 full service cities in all racial areas that have NO TOWERS near Agon NE NW SE and SW. so your whole argument loses.. and #2 you also can go grey and weaken the attacker until the reds finish him off.. and if that all fails, well, they shouldve not chased whoever to go red in the first place.

this is a /cry post, get over it

[Juvante]

So the new alignment changes will certainly help the general douchebaggery in noob areas, no questions about that.

It's incredibly annoying to those clans/alliances that own Cities or Hamlets however.

Say a clan has a few red guys, they are PKers because they want to be. Your clan has a city or hamlet so it's not a big deal. Now some random unclanned idiot comes along and tries to kill the red guys. The non-red members of the clan are unable to help their chaos clanmates due to the new changes in alignment.

Here's my idea. It's quite feasible, as the game is well aware of who is doing what in a city (system channel spam, anyone?).

When someone who is not a member of the owning clan/their allies enter the grounds of a city/hamlet, change that person to rogue for the duration of their stay on the city/hamlet grounds, plus 10sec. Not chaos, just rogue. This allows the owning clan to deal with (or ignore) non clan or ally members without changing the stupid alignment system anymore.

Before the arguing begins, I would like to point out that nobody other than the owning clan/allies has any business being in a clan city/hamlet. My idea would allow the owning clan/alliance to deal with visitors as they see fit, without having to bother with alignment issues. This does not break the game for people in noob areas or NPC cities, nor does it alter the current alignment mechanics.

Discuss.

They need to add in a new status called "Intruder" status. So it doesn't make you rogue and attackable by everyone but just that guild and its allies so you can remove people off your land.

[Sushibandit]

Disagree, there are plenty of ways around the alignment system. E.G. do not deliver the killing blow and do not gank, cause them to go grey, etc.



Exactly. Plus why do you care if you go red or not? You're apparently hanging out at your clan's city anyway. If you need to go to racial city, go farm some alignment. Apparently all you'll need is one kill! :P



Couldn't you just kill the guy, and even if you turn red, you can farm your clanmates until you are back to blue status?


Since you are all saying roughly the same thing, I'll answer you all at the same time. Certainly there are ways around the alignment system, but why should I have to work around the system when I am on home soil? Yeah, it's not a huge deal, but it is annoying.

Also, the person/people that like to drop in to try and kill our reds are risking absolutely nothing by doing so. Why should they get a free pass at going after our reds while we risk gear/alignment loss to drive them off? If nothing else, that's not "fair".


I disagree on what you "point out." Player cities should NOT be clan hideaways. They should be robust locations of community and trade, of course depending on what the clan wants.

My suggestion here would be no alignment +/- in clan cities. The clan could kill with impunity if they so wished, but that reputation would stop friendly travelers from visiting.


I'm not saying they should be "safe zones" or "hideaways", and I like your idea as well. I merely presented one of several ways of handling "guests" on clan/alliance property. I disagree with your public bindslot idea though, do to the volatile nature of Darkfall politics (spies).


what? no. no towers in clan cities EVER.


I agree.


Totally disagree.. #1 there are 4 full service cities in all racial areas that have NO TOWERS near Agon NE NW SE and SW. so your whole argument loses.. and #2 you also can go grey and weaken the attacker until the reds finish him off.. and if that all fails, well, they shouldve not chased whoever to go red in the first place.


Those 4 full-service cities are owned by NPCs, so they can assign whatever rules (lack of) that they want. Also my argument has nothing to do with going red or not.. I thought I made that clear. My argument is in respect to dealing with intruders/guests on clan property. Sure if a certain clan is continuously passing through and attacking you can just wardec them, but I've been seeing more and more groups of unclanned people moving through at absolutely no risk trying to kill clan/ally members on clan/ally soil. We should have a way to deal with them without dancing around the alignment system.


They need to add in a new status called "Intruder" status. So it doesn't make you rogue and attackable by everyone but just that guild and its allies so you can remove people off your land.


Another possible solution.

Like I said, I wanted to open discussion on the idea that clans/alliances should be able to deal with guests as they see fit - without having to work around or deal with the alignment system. Alignment is for NPCs, why should the game care what happens on "private property"?

[Hyiero]

Like I said, I wanted to open discussion on the idea that clans/alliances should be able to deal with guests as they see fit - without having to work around or deal with the alignment system. Alignment is for NPCs, why should the game care what happens on "private property"?

Because nothing in this game player made or player owned is "private property" which is one of the huge pluses to this game,you should continue to have to pay the price of killing a innocent person coming into your city to kill the current outcast/criminal aka "The Red Guy" just because he is in your walls doesn't erase his actions so no keep the system completely the way it is and just pay the price to kill the blue, the only way I would say change the system is maybe raise the alignment to 20/25 that way you could kill 2 or 3 without going blue,but no player cities should not get a free pass on killing blues.....

[Virtra]

Couldn't you just kill the guy, and even if you turn red, you can farm your clanmates until you are back to blue status?
Yes, and that is what people will do. But that is a stupid way to run an alignment system.

[inademv]

There is no reason for the alignment system to protect you when you yourself are not being attacked.

Also, don't be such a fucking pussy about going red.

[fr0g]

I don't think they need to go grey, but I think if you kill anyone who isn't in your clan/alliance while they are on you or your allies city/hamlet territory it shouldn't affect your alignment at all. This would basically serve the exact same purpose as your suggestion.

Good suggestion!

[inademv]

I disagree on what you "point out." Player cities should NOT be clan hideaways. They should be robust locations of community and trade, of course depending on what the clan wants.

My suggestion here would be no alignment +/- in clan cities. The clan could kill with impunity if they so wished, but that reputation would stop friendly travelers from visiting. Further, foreign players should be able to bind at any clanstone (a limited number) but the owning clan can set a price (limited to 0g - 100g or somesuch) which can be collected by an officer.

Your suggestion contradicts your first preference toward clan cities. No one will want to go to a place where random assholes can decide to kill you and take your stuff with no consequences should they choose to do so.

[Virtra]

There is no reason for the alignment system to protect you when you yourself are not being attacked.

Also, don't be such a fucking pussy about going red.
Who says that anybody is? The point is that alignment is supposed to be a measure of something, and right now its inaccurate. What decisions people make based on it is completely secondary.

[inademv]

Who says that anybody is? The point is that alignment is supposed to be a measure of something, and right now its inaccurate. What decisions people make based on it is completely secondary.

Seems accurate enough to me. If you are going to defend someone who is red then you better be prepared to go red yourself.

[Azzerhoden]

Because many players in hamlets/cities are also players who visit NPC cities for trade.

The issue is not being able to defend what you own or help support without having to pay an additional price.

Often when you have raiders, you do not have time to declare war. You engage, regardless of their race.

Even worse all those who are in no clan. You cannot even decalre war against them.

[inademv]

Because many players in hamlets/cities are also players who visit NPC cities for trade.

The issue is not being able to defend what you own or help support without having to pay an additional price.

Often when you have raiders, you do not have time to declare war. You engage, regardless of their race.

Even worse all those who are in no clan. You cannot even decalre war against them.

If you are engaging them to defend an enemy of your race then you are essentially an enemy of your race as well.

[Rongar]

Here is my feeling on this... Tresspass and die it is the rule in most of the world why not in a game?

Give clans the ability to put up towers that only work on no challange is in play so they cannot be exploited during a challange. Let the tower take care of the rif raf.
Allow clans to add toons that are not in the owning clan access to different buildings and block from the rest (For recruituing and those who have the sence to ask hey can I use your stuff)

[Virtra]

Seems accurate enough to me. If you are going to defend someone who is red then you better be prepared to go red yourself.

If you are engaging them to defend an enemy of your race then you are essentially an enemy of your race as well.

Actually that's a good point.

[Elaida]

Disagree, there are plenty of ways around the alignment system. E.G. do not deliver the killing blow and do not gank, cause them to go grey, etc.

I think they changed this in some way or what happened to me was just a bug. I attacked a player in our city and one of my clan mates took the last hit on him and ganked him but I still lost alignment for it.

There should be another system I agree, because by killing one person you go red now (I am already red and have been so it doesn't effect me as it does my clan mates) even if they are trespassing your lands. Pretty much what it says is even if you have enemies in your city and they're trying to farm your resources you cannot kill them if they are the same race as you because now you'll go red for protecting your city.

[Hyiero]

Give clans the ability to put up towers

Go shoot yourself now...plz.....no more motherfucking towers,anywhere especially ones that players can build

[rwp80]

/signed

A good simple solution with no bad side-effects.

[keeperofstars]

lol what? since the change, ive been getting fucked over by clans all day long.

Why? cause they bind at their hamlet, come chargeing to spawns, take the alignment hit, go red. Noting I cannot defend cause if I kill them I go red.

They however take their token red guy have him unclan, and then farm alignment back on him, till they are good again. No problems / sweat.

Before the change I could head to other racial area build alignment and when a same race guy attacked me defend myself, knowning it was just a small alignment hit.

If anything clans/hamlets are more of an issue now then before, cause they can really abuse the system.

As more people catch on, the stupid raiding will get worse and things going to get bad all over again, but this time non-clanned / clans without cities / hamlets just have to bend over and accept being ganked or going red.
so stop your whiny bitching.

[inademv]

lol what? since the change, ive been getting fucked over by clans all day long.

Why? cause they bind at their hamlet, come chargeing to spawns, take the alignment hit, go red. Noting I cannot defend cause if I kill them I go red.

They however take their token red guy have him unclan, and then farm alignment back on him, till they are good again. No problems / sweat.

Before the change I could head to other racial area build alignment and when a same race guy attacked me defend myself, knowning it was just a small alignment hit.

If anything clans/hamlets are more of an issue now then before, cause they can really abuse the system.

As more people catch on, the stupid raiding will get worse and things going to get bad all over again, but this time non-clanned / clans without cities / hamlets just have to bend over and accept being ganked or going red.
so stop your whiny bitching.

Are you really so thick as to imply that what you just detailed is any different from what was already happening?

[keeperofstars]

Are you really so thick as to imply that what you just detailed is any different from what was already happening?

It was same, however a single player, could go out and build up alignment using same exploits, such as killing red player, at chaos stone.

Then when these dick heads would come by you could just fight them take the alignment hit and not a problem.

Now you can't do that instead, the single player defends himself, ends up red instantly, and sent to a chaos stone, where he then has to find a red person, or a different race to kill. For a single player this can be a bit hard. espeically with play times.

Not to mention, I can no longer deal with mob griefers, and loot stealers. Before hand I could use my positive alignment and kill off a loot stealer. No bigs.

Now I can't instead I have to sit there while he takes my crap, or go red.

So with all the new bull shit the new alignment system put in I really don't want to hear a person in a clan with a hamlet bitching cause they have to farm off their token red guy for a few minutes, cause they went red defending their hamlet.

[Narcowski]

<snip/rant>

If you don't like the solo life maybe you should make friends? The alignment system is better now than it was, though I still think the penalties aren't quite harsh enough.

There is (still) absolutely no reason to be red unless you're stupid or want to be.

[inademv]

It was same, however a single player, could go out and build up alignment using same exploits, such as killing red player, at chaos stone.

Then when these dick heads would come by you could just fight them take the alignment hit and not a problem.

Now you can't do that instead, the single player defends himself, ends up red instantly, and sent to a chaos stone, where he then has to find a red person, or a different race to kill. For a single player this can be a bit hard. espeically with play times.

Not to mention, I can no longer deal with mob griefers, and loot stealers. Before hand I could use my positive alignment and kill off a loot stealer. No bigs.

Now I can't instead I have to sit there while he takes my crap, or go red.

So with all the new bull shit the new alignment system put in I really don't want to hear a person in a clan with a hamlet bitching cause they have to farm off their token red guy for a few minutes, cause they went red defending their hamlet.

If you run solo and make the first strike then be prepared to face the consequences.

[inademv]

If you don't like the solo life maybe you should make friends? The alignment system is better now than it was, though I still think the penalties aren't quite harsh enough.

There is (still) absolutely no reason to be red unless you're stupid or want to be.

Damn you for clicking submit faster than me. :<

[Jreed]

Why shouldn't ARAC clan members be red to their own race?

[inademv]

Why shouldn't ARAC clan members be red to their own race?

Why should they be?