I was going to leave this thread alone as I felt I had said everything I really needed to say on the subject, and the matter was in the hands of HCS.
For what it is worth I have advocated trial runs of new PvP changes in future. A month was my suggested time frame to give HCS the time to analyse the effects on the game of any new ideas. I'm cool with that. It depends if HCS can justify coding development time on an idea that may run for a month and then be withdrawn - either to build a version of this idea or to undo coding and recreate the original system - both may be quite labour intensive, and not make sense to do both tasks if only one will be used, unfortunately - I wish it were otherwise, but HCS has to manage their employees time effectively. So we will have to see what they decide to do. We have put our ideas up for consideration.
However when I read this I was reminded of one thing I have not addressed. Victim blaming by the PvP community to justify their act of counter bounty on the board. I think it is reprehensible. So on seeing this I feel I must respond.
I will put anything up that there is more to this typical story of losing 5 levels for a 10 stam clear... anything!
Luis, this is unworthy, and it is not fair.
It is victim blaming.
You are basically saying "I don't know what happened but I bet he deserved it!" That sounds very reasonable - full of measured reflection. How do you know? What objective grounds do you have? None. Typical story - you admit that this happens with frequency then. Do you assume that EVERY time someone gets hit back on the BB they did something to deserve it? That is self serving self justification of your act to choose to escalate the conflict, CB and get your buddies to hit back. If you are incapable of ever admitting your side can do wrong then where are we?
Victim blaming is wrong. It is an ugly tactic used to justify ugly practices, and should be stopped.
It is self-serving propaganda to justify the act you want to commit - which is to counter bounty people.
Whose rules are being broken? Who is judging whether or not a person should be hit back for taking a bounty? Your rules, your decision, you have all the power, and not surprisingly, you like it that way.
It is the PvP players who make the first hit, who actually have a choice to act. See up thread for why all the choices a Non-PvP player are negative once he has been hit.
They are all negative because of Counter bounty and the ability of the initial aggressor (the PvP player posted to the board) to use it first in every circumstance.
The excuses for using CB have been dressed up in codes and rules, all unwritten and unenforceable. And upheld by people who interest is to preserve their power over the BB, whose interest is in continued hitting. It's what you do.
I'd respect you all a lot more if you just came out and admitted "We like using CB because if we keep hitting people back on the board for taking our bounties or delevelling us, eventually they go away, and we get to do our gold hits/ any hits without fear of retribution. We created our codes of conduct as a smokescreen to justify our naked self interest and advancement of our position within the game." Because that is what your actions add up to. Maybe you have not considered it in that way. But that is how it looks to folk outside of the PvP loop.
If it isn't a 100 stam clear that is wrong, it is a 10 stam at the wrong time. What is the BH'er to do - hit between 6 and 9 eastern standard time, holding a carrot in his right hand while chanting hail mary's? Would that be acceptable? No sorry - should have been the left hand - Counter Bounty time! That is how absurd your justifications are.
Instead we get ever more flimsy excuses to hit back and use counter bounty. Each one tailored to the specific context of the complaint raised, to find a way to blame the bounty hunter for your choice to hit him back. If you can't use real rules to win your argument you invoke your imaginary rules that your community supposedly agrees to. Is there a charter somewhere you sign? Can we see it? Maybe you just want to counter bounty because you are bored and your friends want something to do. Admit that then, but don't try to take some sort of bogus moral high ground and say you are 'punishing' people for doing the 'wrong thing' on the board. The only wrong thing they are doing is hitting you, which you don't like, but you deserve, because you chose to hit someone else first. If you are unwilling to admit that truth either, then again we are at an impasse. The only people who deserve to be on the board are the people who make attacks off the board. You get there no other way. You are there to be punished for that act. The victim doesn't post you so you can have fun dancing the BB, he posts you so you can be punished for hitting him. You should never have been given counter bounty, as whatever fair use it may have been originally put to, there isn't much left.
Ultimately this is not about examples, and individual verbal acts of dexterity to produce a new justification for the act of CBing - though I personally find it hypocritical. Why? Because you reserve the right to 100 stam people when you counter bounty, but somehow it is not okay for you to be even 10 stammed, if you can find some pretext to CB. One rule for you, one rule for the rest of us. Simple straight hypocrisy. Unless you 10 stam folk when you counter bounty them to show them how is should be done??
It is about the game rules. If you have an unwritten rule that says you'd 'never' CB a 10 stam clear, then why do you resist the idea that 10 stam clears be immune from bounty? Why not let the unwritten rule become actual game code?
Because they could be abused in the current system - though it would take a lot of work.
So then, change the current system: remove the BH's choice of whether to 10 or 100 stam, if you make the punishment set by the victim, and the BH the simple enforcer of that punishment with no discretion of his own - most of your excuses for CB go away. You don't have your unwritten rules to get bent out of shape over - there is the crime, and the choice of punishment. 10 stam, 100 stam doesn't matter. This "don't hit me near my bounty expiry time" excuse for CB is ridiculous. And some within the PvP community agree it is a poor argument - which proves you are not a monolithic block of players all in agreement, and do not all follow the same rules. If you do not all follow the same rules, why should we have faith in them at all, or believe that just because one person says they follow a particular rule - that the next guy will have any reason to do so? There is none - because the rules are not real, not enshrined in game code. Your rules mean nothing because there is no way of knowing who will choose to adhere to them, or when. They undermine faith in your community. You have to take your lumps. You made the first hit, you CHOSE to attack someone without warning - they should get their chance to administer punishment. As Mzz said - some people will never want to PvP - so giving them free hits back does not work. But allowing them to set a punishment does - if they are prepared to pay for it. That way they feel they do not remain victims, they become participants.
BH should be immune to CB so they can not be repeatedly hit when trying to do their jobs and driven out of the game. I have argued this is what has happened over the years on the BB. The PvP community is motivated, organised and tightknit (look at you all here on this thread!!) - you have worked well together, and defeated all comers, but defeat via CB is crushing - it is who can keep losing 5 longest, and acts as a disincentive to come back, sooner or later. Who is going to keep playing a game where their opponents get to call for back up first and overwhelm them with numbers every time? The dead BB is proof of the disincentive CB has become to try using the BB as punishment for the original off board attack.
So please do not blame the victim here. You are blaming the victim of CB on the BB using your rules and your justifications, none of which are actual game rules, and none of which are verifiable or enforceable. We only ever have your word to take for it, and why should we be forced to accept your word? I'd rather have a clear and objective rule, that is consistent for all, thank you. You can deny anyone ever gets CB'd for a simple clear. People keep saying they did. Who should we believe, the onlookers to this argument? You then try to tell them it was their fault. Their fault for trying to complete a bounty on someone who chose to hit another player. You are trying to make yourselves look good and sound honourable while trying to escape punishment for your original primary act of aggression.
Blaming the victim ultimately makes you look weak. If your justifications for CB were so strong, you would let them become actual game rules - no CB on a 10 stam clear. You resist that. Because 20 people might get together to delevel you using 10 stam hits. How likely is that? You hide behind your ever shifting codes because you just like the ability, and enjoy the advantage of CB.
One more time - victim blaming is ugly, and it is wrong. You should not have to resort to it to justify your behaviour. You should be better than that. It is yet another reason why the wider community has walked away from and does not engage in PvP - if someone is going to be told it is their fault they just lost 5 when they did nothing wrong, they are not going to be inclined to play that game, with those people again - trust is lost. The PvP game community shrinks with each person who decides not to bounty hunt any longer.
The system needs clarity and consistency, not unwritten rules and codes of behaviour that suit the makers of those codes. Doesn't have to be my ideas, could be none of them, I don't care, but the system needs to be clear and fair for all to see, otherwise you will never get more people to willingly participate in it.
No more victim blaming.
Edited by Belaric, 11 April 2014 - 20:46.