Return of Reckoning

Caleb wrote: Wed Jan 24, 2024 1:58 am To add a real example that happened this week caused by Killboard KDA ( unfortunately without showing any screenshots or names, since that is against the rules ).

A player has been griefing and abusing their own team-mates throughout the week in Scenarios, by abandoning fights where they could possibly die, to the point they AFK-ed in camp even during [WINNING SCENARIOS], in order to preserve their KDA, causing their team to lose a valuable Tank/DPS and very likely cause their team to lose.

All of this in order to be on the Weekly Leaderboard and have a ridiculous high KDA on their character - that they later boasted about on the official RoR Discord and after a few questions, they have been connected to several other characters who has been seen doing this in-game.

== This is actually a documented case, with several screenshots of proof and also one reported/filed offense at Gamemasters for one of the characters, for which they got a minor quitter punishment apparently ==

Yep, afking in scenario ist definitely an Killboard issue, wasn't there before and will be gone together with kdr...

Caleb wrote: Wed Jan 24, 2024 1:58 am A player has been griefing and abusing their own team-mates throughout the week in Scenarios, by abandoning fights where they could possibly die, to the point they AFK-ed in camp even during [WINNING SCENARIOS], in order to preserve their KDA, causing their team to lose a valuable Tank/DPS and very likely cause their team to lose.

So it was a WINNING SC until the Person decided to leave because of (whatever ?) and then it was a loosing SC ? sounds like he carried it.
I guess he was interested in ganking and winning if possible - so the question would be - why did he think he had to go afk ?

also why do you think this behaviour would change without a Killboard ?
for me it sounds more like you are unhappy with the behaviour of a certain type of people and try to pin the reason on a statboard.

But all of us are unhappy with specific behaviour of our fellow realmmates -
- i cant stand people in SC who blindly charge alone into 12 people just to die, instead of waiting and playing together with others
- whats with the solo people who go for objective and are only able to capture because their teammates are shredded to pieces because they decided to not support them.
- the tank that NEVER guards or is doing his alone stuff ?


A ganker with a good Killstat is something i actually like to have in my random queue ! why ? because he knows how to kill stuff and if i support him enough it will enhance the chance of winning the SC.

am I frustrated sometimes that he decides not to fight when the risk is too high but the chance of winning is there ? YES. But there is lots of other behaviour that leads to more losses and hurts your Team more than his (you can work with it - there is other behaviour where no workaround exist and you simply have to live with 1 person less in your team)

Caleb wrote: Wed Jan 24, 2024 1:58 am To add a real example that happened this week caused by Killboard KDA ( unfortunately without showing any screenshots or names, since that is against the rules ).

A player has been griefing and abusing their own team-mates throughout the week in Scenarios, by abandoning fights where they could possibly die, to the point they AFK-ed in camp even during [WINNING SCENARIOS], in order to preserve their KDA, causing their team to lose a valuable Tank/DPS and very likely cause their team to lose.

All of this in order to be on the Weekly Leaderboard and have a ridiculous high KDA on their character - that they later boasted about on the official RoR Discord and after a few questions, they have been connected to several other characters who has been seen doing this in-game.

== This is actually a documented case, with several screenshots of proof and also one reported/filed offense at Gamemasters for one of the characters, for which they got a minor quitter punishment apparently ==

Im curious, could you post here a link to killboard for that SC? No additional data required. Definitions for "winning" scenario vary quite alot between people playing so i cant take it as an ultimate truth without seeing stats.

Ashoris mentioned much worse cases which should be prioritized way more for quitter punishment. Once there is badly geared healer rushing frontline to stand still there trying to cast group heals under full focus or RDPS who is not kiting at all im way more frustrated then if i meet ganker in my team who chase KDR, they at least can kill and play somewhat properly but very unreliable if situation is unclear, yes. I also value it as much better then tank who goes into objectives solo, spams /sc chat blaming all the rest when his team mates are being butchered by stronger enemy.
Such clueless healers/worthless rdps who cant kite, solo deftard snb tanks in scs who abandon team and go for objectives are way more griefing then ganker/KDR chaser not being very active in unclear situation.

nocturnalguest wrote: Wed Jan 24, 2024 11:32 amI also value it as much better then tank who goes into objectives solo, spams /sc chat blaming all the rest when his team mates are being butchered by stronger enemy.

‘There are more things in heaven and earth, dear nocturnalguest, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy...’

In other words, what you ignore here is the immutable fact individual scenarios are designed around individual mechanics, at least one of which can not be denied. As the primary example, if the point-gain construct of an SC involves capturing a flag or running/holding an object, you can not capture that flag if you refuse to go to that flag and you can not run or hold the object if you refuse to go to where that object is. This statement is true regardless of what else may or may not be true in regard to any scenario.

As a specific example, consider Nordenwatch. Ninety percent of the time ninety percent of Order players stop at the bridge and refuse to move any farther.

"Well, I can see the flag from here...I mean, I wouldn't want to get too close, like Destro is doing, can't be like them, I will just stay here at the bridge and OH MY GOD A WITCH ELF WHERE IS MY TANK!!!!"

But yeah yeah, I know, everybody else sucks.

Martok wrote: Wed Jan 24, 2024 2:24 pm

nocturnalguest wrote: Wed Jan 24, 2024 11:32 amI also value it as much better then tank who goes into objectives solo, spams /sc chat blaming all the rest when his team mates are being butchered by stronger enemy.

‘There are more things in heaven and earth, dear nocturnalguest, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy...’

In other words, what you ignore here is the immutable fact individual scenarios are designed around individual mechanics, at least one of which can not be denied. As the primary example, if the point-gain construct of an SC involves capturing a flag or running/holding an object, you can not capture that flag if you refuse to go to that flag and you can not run or hold the object if you refuse to go to where that object is. This statement is true regardless of what else may or may not be true in regard to any scenario.

As a specific example, consider Nordenwatch. Ninety percent of the time ninety percent of Order players stop at the bridge and refuse to move any farther.

"Well, I can see the flag from here...I mean, I wouldn't want to get too close, like Destro is doing, can't be like them, I will just stay here at the bridge and OH MY GOD A WITCH ELF WHERE IS MY TANK!!!!"

But yeah yeah, I know, everybody else sucks.

True, but there are two other things to consider:

1) You have to take the fight where the enemy brings it to you, no matter if you are an objective
2) Going for the flag or whatever the POI is brings you often directly IN the fight, while as a healer or range dps you want to move around it. In this Nordenwatch example, as soon as you leave the bridge you only have a small room to move and the enemy can completly cut you off from any withdrawal chance.
The only way to have enough space to move around with the ability to retreat is going where destro is coming from and hope your group will support you there.

To use your own words: "There are more things in heaven and earth..."

Martok wrote: Wed Jan 24, 2024 2:24 pm

nocturnalguest wrote: Wed Jan 24, 2024 11:32 amI also value it as much better then tank who goes into objectives solo, spams /sc chat blaming all the rest when his team mates are being butchered by stronger enemy.

‘There are more things in heaven and earth, dear nocturnalguest, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy...’

In other words, what you ignore here is the immutable fact individual scenarios are designed around individual mechanics, at least one of which can not be denied. As the primary example, if the point-gain construct of an SC involves capturing a flag or running/holding an object, you can not capture that flag if you refuse to go to that flag and you can not run or hold the object if you refuse to go to where that object is. This statement is true regardless of what else may or may not be true in regard to any scenario.

As a specific example, consider Nordenwatch. Ninety percent of the time ninety percent of Order players stop at the bridge and refuse to move any farther.

"Well, I can see the flag from here...I mean, I wouldn't want to get too close, like Destro is doing, can't be like them, I will just stay here at the bridge and OH MY GOD A WITCH ELF WHERE IS MY TANK!!!!"

But yeah yeah, I know, everybody else sucks.

Agree with citation, didnt aim to describe every possible in game situation but rather share common view from other pov.

In regards to the rest. Why so salty?

What you seem to ignore here is the immutable fact that each individual scenario are first and foremost about fighting, its their primary objective. Given the example of Nordenwatch your out of **** numbers (that are not supported by either killboard statistics analyze or my ingame experience) are only one of many possible things to happen under conditions where order players have no proper frontline so they dont push with their RDPS en mass into choppas/mshs, cant blame them for that tbf. Also if you'd play destro you would know that same things happen down the hill for destro then all their magi/rsh/st sorcs just stop right there and refuse to proceed further into sl/wl.

To not go deeper into pointless discussions quick thesis is the following - fighting is top priority, objectives are secondary. Not accepting this is your choice, but its how this game works.

You cant play objectives alone (or fully focus your team upon them) and need to evaluate if playing them is even possible according to how fights go. No point for all those order RDPS stopping at a bridge to push further into a meatgrinder of properly supported destro melee if they have no proper order frontline to support such push (and tbf ive never seen supported sl/wl stoping at bridge and staring into enemy, ive yet more often saw unsupported sl/wl solo charge the flag 200ft ahead of team, pop snare immunity and then solo rush the backline and after that spam /sc with "jeez, need to hit healers noobs" or tanks who dont support their dps but instead go to try to either solo kill or punt off healers). It will not result in win, combat mechanics do not allow such, it cant be considered trying. What is possible to do in such case is force enemy to split and hunt for occasional kills. Guerilla tactics (which foremostly lead to ignoring objectives to an extent and try to change the rules of who and where gonna take a fight to reach a goal of picking up some enemy and try to snowball this), taking into account how strong enemy is, may even win you such SC.

DP

Everdin wrote: Wed Jan 24, 2024 2:49 pmTrue, but there are two other things to consider:

1) You have to take the fight where the enemy brings it to you, no matter if you are an objective

In addition to failing to negate the point I made your statement represents standard defeatist thinking. If you want to win a fight, you do not just stand around and wait for the enemy to 'bring the fight' to you. You control the fight by controlling those areas where you know the enemy must go if they have any desire to win the scenario and thus deny them the initiative. Lounging around in areas which don't matter only leads to one result.

However, as is standard, we are discussing two distinct aspects of scenario play, two aspects which must be dissimilated. As any who watched my series of Scenario Video Guides I published a few years back will know, the base-line standard from which I approached each conversation was the same, expressed primarily as 'all things being equal.' This means the pre-made pug stomps are and should largely be treated as outliers to the central issue of tactics employed in regard to scenario mechanics.

My statement stands. You can not capture any flag or any objective you refuse to actually go to. Healing and ranged class players who refuse to move forward and support an advance are the true detriment in scenario play. If your tanks and DPS gain an advantage forward, that advantage vanishes faster than a KDR Cowboy when someone looks at them cross-eyed when the ranged and healing guys refuse to move up and instead, turn and run when one fracking Destro tank charges them.

I have been streaming this game for years. But I suppose you would have me believe I never actually saw what I actually saw and none of it, despite being broadcast live on Twitch, ever happened.

Everdin wrote: Wed Jan 24, 2024 2:49 pm2) Going for the flag or whatever the POI is brings you often directly IN the fight...

Which is exactly the point. If you control the flag in Caledor Woods and your enemy refuses to come up there and challenge for control, guess what? You win. If they do move up and challenge, guess what? You get to fight.

Everdin wrote: Wed Jan 24, 2024 2:49 pm...while as a healer or range dps you want to move around it.

As a healer or ranged class if your Tanks and DPS are moving forward, you have to move forward or you are just fracking your team over. It is called momentum, and once either side gains momentum in a fight that fight must keep moving forward. And some healer standing around between a hundred and a hundred and fifty-feet away screaming 'where's my guard, where's my guard, OMG where's my guaaaaaaaaaaaaard!' isn't worth a guard because the instant they gee attacked they will turn and run.

All things being equal, aggression wins fights.

Everdin wrote: Wed Jan 24, 2024 2:49 pmIn this Nordenwatch example, as soon as you leave the bridge you only have a small room to move and the enemy can completly cut you off from any withdrawal chance.

Unless, and I'm just spit-balling here, you push the opposition from the flag and then, wait for it...move forward. If your only concern in a scenario fight is your escape route then you are useless in a scenario fight.

Everdin wrote: Wed Jan 24, 2024 2:49 pmThe only way to have enough space to move around with the ability to retreat is going where destro is coming from and hope your group will support you there.

This is called 'team effort.' Staying together, applying pressure, managing and controlling the fight, and maintaining the initiative. Scattering because one S&B Chosen attacks the back line only leads to one result.

Everdin wrote: Wed Jan 24, 2024 2:49 pmTo use your own words: "There are more things in heaven and earth..."

Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, so thanks.

nocturnalguest wrote: Wed Jan 24, 2024 3:11 pmWhat you seem to ignore here is the immutable fact that each individual scenario are first and foremost about fighting, its their primary objective.

I repeat, the statement I made is true regardless of what else may or may not be true in regard to any scenario. You are arguing a straw-man.

Martok wrote: Wed Jan 24, 2024 4:55 pm

nocturnalguest wrote: Wed Jan 24, 2024 3:11 pmWhat you seem to ignore here is the immutable fact that each individual scenario are first and foremost about fighting, its their primary objective.

I repeat, the statement I made is true regardless of what else may or may not be true in regard to any scenario. You are arguing a straw-man.

"No, you!"

According to your reply to Everdin i didnt clearly get you tho, i was more thinking of "go for objective vs go for kills". Regardless of that, the other points still stands tho, everything depends on possibility to put up decent fight, if you happen to have unga bunga unsupported RDPS group vs somewhat supported melee group then you cant rush middle flag in Nordenwatch and should play differently. Thus i dont think that Noderwatch example with people stopping at bridge is anyhow relevant, there are lots of conditions where its justified, for example you for sure know you will not win fight. Other thing is that you need to somehow break enemy formation and split them, many options to do that and luring them on a bridge and then scatter around kiting out is one of them too.
In regards to CW there are always situations where you cant push depending on what you have vs what enemy has. This SC should be 6v6 only without a flag. Such "king of the hill" mechanic considering ror combat mechanics on top is crap for 12v12, it should either be just 12v12 deathmatch without a flag at all.
Also strongly disagree with your statement in regards to healer&ranged classes pushing along everyone. They need space, they need control over battlefield, they cant simply advance all together hugging tanks. You say move forward, but they dont have to specifically move exactly forward, they should keep los, keep distance and be ready to move somewhere to reach team and dont get caught by enemy. Its not always forward.
Agression may win fights for sure, but those that are winnable. Else its just feeding.