The vast majority of people had tons of fun and weren’t part of the poo-flinging, it’s usually a bunch of vile disgruntled players that need to ruin it whilst the majority had a blast. I find the battles to be fun and I haven’t seen that much “foul play”. Even if you have “easy” rules, there will always be spergs.
And full on PvP? When the servers aready lag to oblivion and beyond when 50 people auto attack each other? I mean it’s easy to say “just get fair numbers and pvp normally 4Head”, but it wont work like that.
Oh, I enjoyed what I participated in. At the end of the day, it goes without saying that if people set out to sabotage something then it probably won’t work out positively if it’s a community effort.
Just as a personal opinion, I find RPPvP extremely awkward in this game no matter how it’s presented and the servers are going to lag no matter what.
When I said that, I wasn’t taking big numbers into account, tbh. There could be other ways you could do it. Separate zones, different groups/parties/raids etc going up against each other in compact controlled units rather than enormous cluster-squads.
I don’t generally take what’s represented by character model placement/action as my mental representation of what’s actually happening in the role-play. I’ve played role-playing games before where players have role-played the start of a fight, pvp’d to decide the outcome and then gone with it.
It worked, it was fun, it didn’t take all day and there wasn’t any drama. A long time ago, someone suggested those uh, was it ‘rated battlegrounds’ to decide the outcome of large scale battles? I don’t even know if those are still a thing but maybe that could be an option.
Not pooping on the concept entirely. I just don’t think it can be implemented well.
Fair enough, so you want to know what’s wrong with RP-PvP campaigns? the answer is nothing, the system works fine (Except the points system, that always sucks). What’s wrong with RP-PvP isn’t the system, it’s the people who attend.
You’ve got people who think that just because they’re in a big guild that they’re morally righteous and can do whatever they want as they sniff their fellow guildies , commenting on the thickness of it. You’ve got people who break rules constantly because they think that they won’t get caught, which most the time they do but because they know one of the campaign DM’s , all they get is a slap on the wrist. You’ve got overcompetaive twonks who forget that this isn’t a competition and think they must go all out like Goku in a brothel.
RP-PvP is fine, it’s the people that cause all the problems, and I wish I could name and shame because I’ve got a list and I’m checking it twice.
A lot of Alliance players and guilds were perfectly nice, but some people on Alliance were behaving in such a vile way towards Horde players and the organizers OOC that the Horde ended up in agreement that the rest of us would pull out instead of spending another night getting bursted and having abuse hurled at us if there was even a hint of the Alliance not securing some form of victory in various battles.
This all came to a head when on the final night, it was announced that the Horde would evacuate and leave nothing, but the Alliance literally used the OOC announcement to call a charge early, storming in and bursting people down whilst ignoring emotes.
It’s a shame but the Horde, as seen by the internal conflict and such were there to RP, but some Alliance individuals and guilds were literally there to win and they got upset because all of their RP hinged around them winning.
just make an imgur link that contains a picture with an imgur link it that leads to yet another imgur link which just coincidentally happens to lead to an imgur link with a whole host of strangely relevant names on it, badabing badaboom.
Thank you Dudflex! How would you suggest a DM control the campaign environment as to counteract any troublesome people? What could have been done better here?
treat participants as children, set up a system of penalty points, X amount of strikes and you’re out.
Also, clear communication, very clear communication, because apparently on blue side pre-events were being held that did not at all allign with the actual narrative that chook was trying to establish.
You need leaders of equal footing on both sides. Two people at least to mediate both sides angles so no faction bias can exist. A lot of troublesome people crop up because they feel they’re being treated unfairly.
Otherwise it’s usually the obvious bursters/griefers in which you can dedicate people to just popping them until they die.
Also seems that you need unbias people coordinating the event. If what betty says is true (i wasn’t there, so don’t know), then you need the people coordinating to not just give slaps on the wrists if rules are broken.
Adding on the communication front, probably want a channel specifically for reporting griefers and specifically non sign up players. I know alliance had a lot of non sign up people show up and it was pretty annoying getting it communicated from one side to the other.
You can’t, everything people have thought up, other DMs have tried, the only thing we haven’t tried is barring certain Guilds/people from events, which we can’t do because its to unfair on some people within said guilds.
Edit: Look through this thread and you can see evidence of what I’ve talked about.
, commenting on the thickness of it. You’ve got people who break rules constantly because they think that they won’t get caught, which most the time they do but because they know one of the campaign DM’s , all they get is a slap on the wrist. You’ve got overcompetaive twonks who forget that this isn’t a competition and think they must go all out like Goku in a brothel.