Wardecs in MO2

Thread starter #1

Teknique

Junior Member
With the presumed lack of TC at the start and everyone living in NPC towns. To have an authentic MO experience wardec system absolutely needs to be in place.

discuss
 

Wabbajack

Junior Member
It's weird to have a war decc system in npc towns. Like why should the emperor allow you to kill each other in his towns, threatening his citizens and the peace.

War deccs should be a thing for guilds outside of npc kingdoms, allowing a guild to for example to capture the enemies structures etc. Not to grief and gank each other in npc towns.
 

Golt

Trial Member
Wardecs used to be a cool and exciting thing back before TC. Ofc it was also used as a griefing tool. Would be cool to see a forced wardec system back in some form with some changes though.
Maybe only being able to wardec guilds in a town your guild owns (the wardec only being active in that town area) or something like that...idk
 
It's weird to have a war decc system in npc towns. Like why should the emperor allow you to kill each other in his towns, threatening his citizens and the peace.

War deccs should be a thing for guilds outside of npc kingdoms, allowing a guild to for example to capture the enemies structures etc. Not to grief and gank each other in npc towns.
It added a strategic element for non keep owning guilds, to maintain a hold over towns. Guts held Fabernum with a keep, then without. Allowed us to keep hold of Fabernum for years and open up the citizenship program. Was a good way for population control and to assert dominance. You know, outside our naked army slaying donkey's :p

It also added to siege dynamics - One of my fondest memories of the old wardec system was in the last Guts v Koto war, we had a main siege force outside Meduli to hold the outside while we knocked down their dildo tower, while simultaneously using a wardec guild to constantly harass enemy regears inside Meduli itself.

Wardecs were also a reason some wars started, because people got angry over it. While it was used to grief, it also aided in political moves as well as created interesting player interactions.
 
Thread starter #6

Teknique

Junior Member

Groenholdt

Senior Member
Wardecs were also a reason some wars started, because people got angry over it. While it was used to grief, it also aided in political moves as well as created interesting player interactions.
In my experience the wardec system was purely a griefing tool - not to say it didn't help to promote conflict. I can totally see how it could..
I just never understood why people could so easily wardec another guild, and then be allowed to enter a NPC guarded town and kill the rival guild without consequences. The only downside to this system was that you couldn't wardec all guilds in the game and individual players. This system was not balanced and yet again, it was in favor of the griefers/RPK'ers

If MO2 is to succeed, system like this must be balanced for both sides.. otherwise you will just end up with a population of wolves
 
Last edited:

Wabbajack

Junior Member
It added a strategic element for non keep owning guilds, to maintain a hold over towns. Guts held Fabernum with a keep, then without. Allowed us to keep hold of Fabernum for years and open up the citizenship program. Was a good way for population control and to assert dominance. You know, outside our naked army slaying donkey's :p

It also added to siege dynamics - One of my fondest memories of the old wardec system was in the last Guts v Koto war, we had a main siege force outside Meduli to hold the outside while we knocked down their dildo tower, while simultaneously using a wardec guild to constantly harass enemy regears inside Meduli itself.

Wardecs were also a reason some wars started, because people got angry over it. While it was used to grief, it also aided in political moves as well as created interesting player interactions.
Holding a npc town is large guild/empire business and not a griefers guild affair.

Allowing player housing so close to/on empire land is also strange but I do understand it due to myrlands current size. With MO2 I hope to have a real war decc system that allows us to conquer structures, that would be the very core reason of declaring war, not just for PvP.

I do understand what you mean, war deccs have been fun for me as well but the system was flawed and ended up being a griefers tool most of the time.
 

MolagAmur

Well-Known Member
The war dec system was super flawed and wasnt practical with having to have guild crafters and other non-pvp characters in the guild. As others have said, it was really just used as a griefing tool. The whole guild and alliance system need a big overhaul in my opinion. I will say however, with only having one character in MO2, that will help a lot of the issues I have with the current dec system.

What also needs to happen, which Herius asked about long ago, is the flagging system out in the wild. Guilds that control territory should be able to make those territories turn people local grey if they wish, including towns they own. This would solve some issues with the war dec system as well. Again, local grey...not global.

Lastly (which is kinda on the same topic with the territory flagging) I would like to see consequences and benefits (good karma and bad karma if you like) to the actions that guilds take. Nothing too drastic that takes away from the natural outlook that people will have, but something to make people really have to decide their path of being either ruthless killers, a law-abiding guild, or somewhere in between. I realllllly want there to be more reasons to be a certain type of guild (religion?)...rather than everyone just rpk because it's the most profitable...which is how it's been since the beginning.

Sorry I kinda went on a rant. I just had some topics I wanted to talk about before I forgot.
 
I loved wardecs. You know, when there was a single enemy fighter and 3 naked mages outside of the guild, which you couldn't attack at the start cause blue, they tried to blueblock you as much as possible and at any point of time they felt like it they stepped into the fight and starting healing the wartarget. Of cause they turned local gray in that case, but still they had full control of when and how to enter the fight.
And after you killed them they respawned, started attacking you and for some reason you weren't able to defend yourself because they turned back to normal blue when they died, but you were still light gray for them.
Wardecs were an amazing implemented featured, well thought and I would love to see it in the same way in MO2.
Not... That was ironic.
 
Thread starter #11

Teknique

Junior Member
I loved wardecs. You know, when there was a single enemy fighter and 3 naked mages outside of the guild, which you couldn't attack at the start cause blue, they tried to blueblock you as much as possible and at any point of time they felt like it they stepped into the fight and starting healing the wartarget. Of cause they turned local gray in that case, but still they had full control of when and how to enter the fight.
And after you killed them they respawned, started attacking you and for some reason you weren't able to defend yourself because they turned back to normal blue when they died, but you were still light gray for them.
Wardecs were an amazing implemented featured, well thought and I would love to see it in the same way in MO2.
Not... That was ironic.
I'd rather that than what we have TBH. Dred/RPK war was a wardec. now we have permareds from soldier guards.
 
In my experience the wardec system was purely a griefing tool - not to say it didn't help to promote conflict. I can totally see how it could..
I just never understood why people could so easily wardec another guild, and then be allowed to enter a NPC guarded town and kill the rival guild without consequences. The only downside to this system was that you couldn't wardec all guilds in the game and individual players. This system was not balanced and yet again, it was in favor of the griefers/RPK'ers

If MO2 is to succeed, system like this most be balanced for both sides.. otherwise you will just end up with a population of wolves
MO's flagging and territory system is flawed/broken in many areas.

The murdercount system couldn't differentiate between consensual combat, who initiated said combat etc and resulted in people turning red because the people who died wanted to troll or got mad, so dished MC's out. Another reason why the old wardec system was good, could fight your enemies without them abusing the basic murder count system, avoided that whole flaw in the system - But replaced it with the wardec system flaws.

Flagging system could of been fixed by creating a more detailed territory system, allowing separate zones for inside towns/cities and outside in the wild. Guild territories could have options and more control to decide how they wanted flagging to work within their borders.

There's so much that is wrong with MO. But in saying this, out of the current system - I prefer the old, people actually used it and it offered far more player interaction than what the current does.
 
The most immersion breaking thing about wardecs was the fact that you could have a 10vs10 carnage right next to the NPC lictors inside the bank and nobody would even give a shit. This didn't make any sense and turned wardecs into a grief fest, thereby requiring all guilds to have at least one additional guildstone for crafters, etc., which kinda sucked.

I'm totally fine with having forced wardecs, as long as NPC guards would respond to any lawbreaking (including looting of an otherwise blue character) if they see it. The person initiating the attack to a wardecced character should have a temporary status that lets NPC guards know that they are a perpetrator of Tindremic law. This should make wardecs function similarly to gang warfare in the real world, thus most guilds would refrain from doing it in the guarded areas of cities, or would have to develop a strategy to destroy their war targets without attracting the attention of the authorities.
 

deathshroud

Exalted Member
If there was some way of excluding crafters from a wardec then that would help reduce the griefing as the griefing typically involved just killing crafters. This could be done by having different divisions within a guild and those put in crafting would be excluded from wardecs but would not be competitive in pvp or pve.
 
Thread starter #15

Teknique

Junior Member
Not long ago people wanted to force crafters to stay on the stone, by putting some kind of g leave penalty on.
Seems as if the paradigm has shifted so much since sv gutted the system
 
If there was some way of excluding crafters from a wardec then that would help reduce the griefing as the griefing typically involved just killing crafters. This could be done by having different divisions within a guild and those put in crafting would be excluded from wardecs but would not be competitive in pvp or pve.
Crafters will be able to fight back in MO2 tho
 
This may solve the griefing for vets but it still doesn't address the issue for newbs or casual players who are often lurking inside guarded areas. Guarded areas should normally be perceived as safe unless you are a criminal. Of course, the nature of Mortal is such that crimes will occur but they should not be as blatant as a perfectly legal 10v10 gangbang at the bank IMO.
 
Thread starter #19

Teknique

Junior Member
This may solve the griefing for vets but it still doesn't address the issue for newbs or casual players who are often lurking inside guarded areas. Guarded areas should normally be perceived as safe unless you are a criminal. Of course, the nature of Mortal is such that crimes will occur but they should not be as blatant as a perfectly legal 10v10 gangbang at the bank IMO.
 
Thread starter #20

Teknique

Junior Member
This may solve the griefing for vets but it still doesn't address the issue for newbs or casual players who are often lurking inside guarded areas. Guarded areas should normally be perceived as safe unless you are a criminal. Of course, the nature of Mortal is such that crimes will occur but they should not be as blatant as a perfectly legal 10v10 gangbang at the bank IMO.
I'm ok with that risk, if you want to call yourself a guild then you should be able to be challenged. Everything should be a risk, including joining and or creating a guild. Why? because the alternative is that much more boring.
 
Top