How to deal PC imbalance?
What do you when the only option is to not play?

The responsibility, at least, partially, is on those hypothetical max experience fighters not to type 'kill you lol byebye n00b' all the time. Is this about cooperative competition and roleplaying or not?

Well... A few thoughts.

First, staff used to be more hands on here. They used to provide NPC opposition as needed to keep the world dynamic. TO make characters who had little to no other real challenge have interesting lives. And by interesting i mean losses sprinkled in with their victories. But this has fallen out of style as not all players enjoy this kind of challenge. Maybe those in the dominant position could make it clear to staff that they are willing and interested in opposition, even if it meant losses as well as wins. Maybe if staff were convinced they would be willing to do so. maybe.

Second, sometimes it is helpful when a group of high powered PCs with no real competition become each other's competition. I'm not going to say that they SHOULD of that it's the only GOOD way to play. Just that there can be great value in finding ways to MAKE other PCs of similar power your enemies. I would praise someone who could do this but would never look down on someone for choosing not to.

Third... Do your best to look outside of the fight itself. There is a lot that can be done before and after and instead of the 'attack' command. I will freely admit, however, that this kind of resistance takes a LOT of time and effort and you will face losses along the way. But the combat meta is just one aspect of power within the game.

Lastly. Sometimes you just have to live under the oppressive hand of the Big boys TM for a while. There's nothing wrong with there being a group of top end players who are scary as hell with not real competition. It can be themely. It only becomes a problem in my mind when these players use this position to stifle play instead of using it to enrich play.

I don't think that a power imbalance is inherently a bad thing. It is pretty themely after all, as is "might makes right". It also makes sense for a gang to have more power than an individual, a megacorp or crime syndicate to have more power than a street gang, and so on.

Having the power in a situation, real or perceived, should have some responsibility to it though. I've done some very mean things to people but I try to always provide them with an out, or a way to back down. Some way to let me know they've had enough and want to move on, as well as spacing out vattings and things like that. Give them a chance to recover, continue the back-and-forth, or get their revenge.

What I see certain people doing though doesn't seem to really generate much RP. Chain vatting someone and then hiding in their apartment for months, not really generating any RP or engaging in any sort of back-and-forth. Almost intentionally only ever going outside when characters they're in conflict with who might actually do something that would generate further RP, or allow the tables to turn somehow aren't online. Not really creating a back-and-forth or being really a nemesis but almost like the only thing they care about is winning, so they try to chain vat the character until the person stops having fun and gives up.

As much as we recite "it's fun to lose", it certainly seems like the people who always win are having a lot more fun.

I don't know everything though, I could be wrong and maybe things were even previously discussed in local OOC that they wanted their character to die five times in a row and then be permed while they were apologizing and begging for their life on pubSIC. Or you know, "I just started this new career path but I'm sick of this character, so I'll call you a bitch on pubSIC and you can kill me and then run up to Genetek to kill me again".

I somehow got it in my head that you could only play a character for 5 years before you had to perm/retire/sunset them, which isn't true, but implementing such a rule could sort of naturally prevent these kinds of imbalances from happening.

As far as staff involvement goes, I've seen instances of staff trying to corral some players to keep things reasonably balanced, but it does appear to be that some people are just immune to any such thing. Staff may puppet NPCs to threaten them, but no actual action is taken. That may have been related to that thing someone said in the guided discussion about perceptions of favoritism. There's a natural ebb and flow as people join and depart from factions so that while one may have all the PC power for a little while, it isn't just always in one corner. Usually. I would hope though that in such a case where one faction (it would be insane for an unaffiliated individual to have power over a mega corp or syndicate) has all of the PC power, that staff would make some effort keep that in check with respect to the other factions and players in some way, or find a way to re-balance things so that a back-and-forth and RP can happen and it isn't just one faction being able to crush the other(s) with ease before they can gain enough PCs with enough UE to put up a fight and make things interesting.

Yet, I've witnessed the opposite of that. Seemingly in contradiction to any sort of past actions or established relationships that just sort of kills a whole line of RP or natural power ebb and flow.

At any rate though, I don't think that a game that's supposed to be collaborative competition should have any one, two, or even three players wielding all of the PC power. Or if so, not for an extended period of time. Otherwise the only RP that's really being generated is just thinly veiled OOC complaints that "so and so" is bad for the city (game).

If in this hypothetical situation the 'played out senario' is a clean playing field with those PC's sitting at the top in a world sold as 'losing is fun' and 'there is always a bigger fish' and is actively removing large plot plans, RP plans and players.

Does this hypothetical end game really seem remotely positive for anyone in a sustainable way?

Currently I have seen a few solutions, but mainly it seems to come down to.

Join this hypothetical dream team.

Everyone gets destoried or yields so this dream team gets to run the game.

Wait for staff intervention that no long seems an approach now.

I notice there are some taking this outside the realm of the hypothetical. Which means one of two things.

Either there are some grievances being aired which I am not keen on as it is pulling away from the OP, or this hypothetical situation is not hypothetical at all.

So lets get things back on track.

Is this sort of hypothetical situation damaging to the playerbase?

@0x1mm

I think, the point was missed a little, and I am only speaking from an in-theory perspective as to expand beyond any happenings in the game now, previously or in the future. I am genuinely interested in the thoughts upon how people play around a situation like this.

I would say however that that 'instigating fighting through ooc' or IC fighting being based around anything ooc is against the rules. I can only speak personally, as it seems you are directing your response toward me, but I have never made an accusatory statement, especially around cheating or meta unless it was privately with the staff as per the rules around reporting such things.

@goblinfemme

I think that a lot of what you put in here feels sort of unnecessary and vulgar in terms of trying to hit the point. Neither do I feel like these points are detached enough from the game at large. Perhaps you can raise the points in a more constructive and generalised way?

@all

I have made broad-stroke statements about the behaviour I believe to be damaging based on experiences in the game and seeing behavioural changes in the player base as a whole due to these. Anything I put out tends to be in an effort to sense check these statements and observations against the community as a whole and the staff.

It is to spark debate and challenge things that I believe to be negative, my opinion upon it. I am more than happy to be corrected by the community and hope that those in the community feel compelled enough to engage in that sort of thing.

If my efforts to are unwanted, I can just not. It is effort I don't need to put in to nor care to if it is just going to spark childish mudslinging.

Anyway, just read the first post and see what you think.

But... I don't think there is anything the staff can do, or it sets a dangerous precedent. It has to be something the PCs do, like how everyone jumps on PCs who do and say things that aren't themely, like be racist, or say things are auiet in a crowded bar and stuff.

I had a big thing typed up, but brevity is the essence of wit, or something.

If you're UE capped and there's nothing for you to do but slap around people with a year+ of UE gap under you, you should honestly think about vacationing, CP exiting or sunsetting your character. SD isn't a game about lording over your empire or fiefdom, it's a game about the struggle to survive and make a name for yourself among the teeming masses and all the cutthroats across the bar from you.

Winning when wins are of no challenge or risk isn't winning. After a certain point it basically becomes RP power fantasy masturbation, and that's not good for collaborative RP environments.

There's also a really serious lack of 'end game' in SD. Build your empire of sand, stack money until you hit your arbitrary number goal, get some title, and then train up a successor, if there are any, and retire out. There really isn't a problem with older characters who hold down day jobs doing technical work, cyber installs, handing out work and the like. There is a problem with older combat characters feeling the need to handle things personally. If starting over is that terrifying of a prospect, then consider stepping back and working through people instead of handling things yourself. It's much more frustrating, but also much more rewarding and better for the game overall.

Remember: There's no winning in cyberpunk. Tell your story, make your mark, and get a spot on the notable mentions list before you become stale and resented.

I like what @crashdown wrote about using NPCs to check PCs.

One of the things that I appreciate about Sindome is that there is a glass ceiling that no PC will ever break through.

There will always be bigger and more powerful individuals or factions over which even the Max UE'd and fully geared character will not prevail.

That dynamic is necessary to maintain the narrative and keep the game from becoming too heavily imbalanced by the collaboration of powerful characters.

People are tribal by nature. Power abhors a vacuum. There is nothing "wrong" with a powerful character or characters colluding to the "detriment" of the rest of the playerbase. As long as it only occurs for a limited period of time.

Real talk, I simply don't think GM's have the wherewithal to do this correctly. They didn't when we fully staffed and I don't think they do now.

Have GM's who need to use @teleport repeatedly on NPC's then chastise you via XHELP to engage you with conflict is not telling a story. It's a heavy-handed way of being told you're going to lose no matter what and I don't think anyone wants to deal with that.

Maybe my perspective is unique here but I cannot in my right mind justify that action taken by Staff.

@1mm

I feel it is a vast discredit to a fair few players to say there aren't any big time PCs anymore, and that there haven't been for quite a long time.

A compelling, interesting villain that helps build the world's story and community with interaction, conflict and RP I agree is a fantastic thing. I have seen it done well on a number of occasions, some of the most interesting PC's out there are villains of one nature or another. Some of the most interesting NPC's out there are villains.

I agree, that villains are needed to push conflict, to shift things around, to make things that are not liked from a character's perspective.

Most of us have seen big NPC villains put together horrific, but often intriguing and interesting things. Making a big show of it, pulling on the communities and worlds interests to flex power and show force. Even some PC's have pulled this off to a similar degree.

I agree with most of what you are saying, there are some things I do disagree with though.

The hypothetical situation I am putting forward is talking of villains that lack the steps toward creating compelling, interesting and engaging conflict. If this hypothetical situation I have proposed was compelling, interesting and engaging, individuals would not be here making comment about it.

An honest question.

Do you have any suggestions to help alleviate people's troubles and feelings about this hypothetical situation, a new angle or something, please?

@fopsy asked,

Do you have any suggestions to help alleviate people's troubles and feelings about this hypothetical situation, a new angle or something, please?

I am going to offer some background based on my personal experiences here. I am also going to offer some perspective on approximately five years of playing here.

First off, I am sympathetic to what (I think) @fopsy and others are alluding to. It can be frustrating, discouraging, not fun, and a whole slew of other things to not be on "the winning team".

I have probably written enough @notes and BgBB posts on the subject of cliques and power imbalances to craft into a PhD thesis on the subject.

Without discounting or diminishing what has been said, my perspective on the subject is that the community of players and staff has done a good job of preventing any group from being on top for "too long". I base that on the fact that in the ~4 years my current character has been alive, I have seen 4-5 power shifts take place where seemingly unbeating individuals or groups have been either knocked out of their position, or retired.

I believe it is very much a matter of perspective. When we log into the game every day and spend hours upon hours a week playing, it can seem like things "never" change, or change much too gradually. When our character is on the shit list of a powerful character or faction, life can be full of suck. I am by no means discounting how "un-fun" being in that position can be. It can feel hopeless.

All I can offer is the perspective that it will not always be like that. While that power dynamic might exist for much longer than an individual player might want to suffer through, it will not exist for any considerable length of time when viewed on the ~30+ year timeline that Sindome has been active.

@0x1mm offered some good suggestions about how to ICly address power imbalances. It has been my experience that staff and other characters are often supportive of people who use @notes (especially IC-Goals and IC-Actions), combined with roleplaying. It is possible to take on an established faction or small group of active characters.

It is important to keep in mind that those characters have not always been on top. They fought to get there too. They are likely fighting to keep their position.

I don't know the answer to this question, but I think it is worth asking.

Given that it takes about 3-5 years to get a character to Max UE, how long should a character who has "made it" be "allowed" to remain on top? What is a fair tenure for a person / character who has spent hundreds, if not thousands of hours getting to where they are? How long should they be allowed to enjoy the fruits of their labor, even if those fruits are occasionally curb stomping midbies simply because they can?

There are so many variables in the questions above that this could spiral way out of control and down Lord only knows how many rabbit holes. I ask the questions just to get everyone who reads this to put things into perspective. To encourage people to put themselves in other people's shoes.

Because this man is 900 IQ, I'm going to repeat some key things he said and that I agree with.

First, staff used to be more hands on here. They used to provide NPC opposition as needed to keep the world dynamic. TO make characters who had little to no other real challenge have interesting lives. And by interesting i mean losses sprinkled in with their victories...

Staff didn't have a problem with slapping the ever-living shit out of people smallworlding, cheesing gameplay mechanics and doing other sorts of anti-competitive grey area tactics sorts of things.

Want to start murdering white shrouds because a white shroud throw a bomb at your buddy? Congrats, we're going to stick a uber-statted godlike character in a white poncho and wait for you to show your ass. Here's your prize: Genetek.

Want to treat NPC's like money dispensaries? Congrats, you got a GM on that NPC who instead grapples you, steals all your shit and tells you if you do gamey shit one more time, you're getting vatted.

And many more examples...

Second, sometimes it is helpful when a group of high powered PCs with no real competition become each other's competition.

Take your best friend and closest ally and find a reason to totally fuck them over, rob them blind and leave their apartment empty and their corpse in the street. Extra credit will be awarded if you convince them you didn't do it and get them to make someone else's life hell for it.

Seriously. Cliques kill RP games. It's that simple. Make friends, have their backs and be their ace cools, then one day, stop doing it. You just need to find the right context and situations to make it into a good story.

Third... Do your best to look outside of the fight itself. There is a lot that can be done before and after and instead of the 'attack' command.

I'm super guilty of this myself, as I've played absolute bully assholes in the past, and their answer to every problem was a hammer. That said, if you really want to promote the health of the game- seriously- stop doing things yourself if it's not a challenge. Hire someone who has a realistic chance of failure to do the job for you.

Lastly. Sometimes you just have to live under the oppressive hand of the Big boys TM for a while. There's nothing wrong with there being a group of top end players who are scary as hell with not real competition. It can be themely. It only becomes a problem in my mind when these players use this position to stifle play instead of using it to enrich play.

And here is the problem at hand. People playing big boys and not moderating themselves. We need either rival players of comparable status, wealth and skills to moderate them, or we need direct intervention by staff. This was as much of a problem four, five years ago as it is right now, today. The only thing that's changed is there's less players to obfuscate shitty behavior, and people today are being much more transparent and forward in voicing their complaints in a civil manner here and in-game (ooc) instead of just slinging their own poop at one another and posting personal attack memes.

Yes, sometimes your fellow player is ignorant of facts, or is doing something wrong that's obvious to you, or what have you. But other times, there's a honest to god problem, and the best way to get it fixed is to recognize it as legitimate in your own mind and be introspective as to whether or not you, personally, are contributing to the problem with your gameplay.

Edit by Slither: This post above contains information that for those in the know about specific IC situations will make it possible to connect who eggsaresides is to who they play. So, read on only if you are OK with that. I'm leaving the post up because I think in this situation it may be beneficial to the community to read about the 'other side'.

-------------------

Going to start this off by saying that I do not post on the forums often, nor do I feel it necessary to explain the things that happen on a norm, but because people feel the need to bleed through hypotheticals on the forums, I am here and I am the primary reason these conversations are happening. I have been behind more kills than anyone else in the game since June according to management.

This perception of an imbalance is bullshit. My circle is small. In comparison, there are a lot more of you than there are us. It is not our problem that you did not invest in the appropriate systems to compete with us, and there are other ways to do so that do not involve direct engagement with us.

Yes, we have advantages and experience that a majority of you seem to lack, but we are not untouchable and we are not stopping you from figuring these things out for yourselves. Instead of hoping for divine intervention, learn something and acquire the things that we did to get where we are to compete, or just do you and leave us out of it.

What most people do not know is, me and mine are chill as fuck. We, and me in particular, have been lenient and given others opportunities to get out of the shituation they have gotten themselves into, or even left them alone completely when the events involving them ended and there was no further reason to fuck with them.

This has resulted in letting them go when they got caught up in things again, repeatedly. But when they do not get the hint and continue to play victim? There is not much I can do there. Even when I give someone a break from the usual Genetek spa day, they still complain six months later...

More times than not, I do not fuck with people that do not fuck with us first. Directly or indirectly. It is most often the case with these things that I am simply reacting to someone else's actions, not actively seeking it. I am not going around shit stomping people because they have not given me a valid reason to do so.

I am sure it can be extremely frustrating for some of y'all that I respond the way that I do, but it does not have to be that way either. We are willing to extend our hands to the less inclined and pass on our knowledge. I am an asshole, I am aware of that, but I can be nice and the people close to me definitely are much more capable of being so than I am. They are wonderful people, all bias aside, that want to help more than they harm. Most of the fucked up shit and violence is driven by me.

As far as becoming each other's competition goes, I have explicitly done this some months ago, separating myself from a group that had all the odds stacked in their favor from the mix on up. Together, me and this group controlled a large portion of the player base, there was no one that would oppose us, and those that did were strong-armed and killed before they could get any real power of their own because we were a group of experienced and resourceful people backed by powerful organizations and people across the city.

There was absolutely nothing anyone could or would do to poke a hole in that barrel until I stepped up to do so. I was the one that took the initiative along with my partner's help to break up that power bloc. I had no choice but to play it smart because they were backed by so many of y'all, and my partner was repeatedly told to stay out of direct engagements with the opposition. I had no one else at that point. Part of that was my choice, and the other part of that was the lack of anyone not already working with the competition to oppose us.

I understand what it is like to be outnumbered. I understand what it is like to be on the weaker side of the game. Especially when Cerberus was head GM. My last character and his people were much weaker when they attracted the attention of their enemies that were, again, powerful people supported by powerful organizations and people across the city. At a time when I was fairly new to the game myself some years ago.

Each time it is my choice to oppose these people. I am quite familiar with this topic from personal experience accrued over almost eight years playing this shit. As most of my time, each time, has been spent on one side or the other. I have never been the most popular option in either case. I do not mind playing an antagonist that a good chunk of people dislike or hate outright. I am an anti-social creature.

In recent times though, I have seen people do the shit that they condemn us for first hand because I was with them when they were doing it. Others were supported by me to the detriment of the relationships I hold dear quite a few times before things shifted and then some. So no, everything has not been peachy for us all the time.

But no one else, that I am aware of, is ridiculed for having their people that they enjoy playing with as much as we are. They are just as loyal to each other as I am mine. Again, I know because I was once close to these people myself. I am speaking from personal experience, not just throwing out assumptions.

I am not going to point fingers or go into specifics. Though, I will point out that at one point people were going after one person close to me in groups of three well-equipped individuals when they barely recovered from the last time they were killed. At times when I was not around to back them up. I am no stranger to that, I have been in a fight with two allies, but most often just one other person at my side. Not always the same person either despite what people think.

At the end of the day, there is always a reason for what I do. I do not need to explain myself in game. It is out of character for mine to do so, though I have at times. But I am also not going around stomping out the comp for the lulz. I am playing the game like the rest of y'all, and if y'all got to know me and mine, you would realize we ain't as bad as people like to suggest.

I am not going to kill everyone on sight or even every time someone fucks with us. We do other shit to fuck with our opposition, and it is pretty clear that it ain't obvious, but it happens. Some people are just a special case. Some people are just jobs. And some jobs are even handed down by NPCs. I am not blaming anyone, it is what it is. I am simply explaining.

And I am working on it with my partner to change how things are, and how I respond to situations now that certain elements are out of the picture. That is not something that y'all might see on the surface because of the way it is delivered, but it is happening. There is a lot of time spent on conflict and violence that we much rather spend on cool shit that others will enjoy too. My partner is all for that kinda shit despite the shit they get for my actions.

Do not drink the kool-aid. We are here to have fun like the rest of y'all, and have much to share if y'all get to know us. My fun is different than your fun, but going forward, I hope y'all find some peace and realize that we ain't here to shit on y'all all the time. Peace.

(Edited by Slither at 7:57 am on 1/24/2023)

@slither I think this is a good conversation for everyone to be having, personally. We're keeping things civil and airing out some shit that's festering in the community, hopefully for the better. We'll see, I guess.

@eggsaresides

I read through your post and had a few points I wanted to make. I've been in your boots before and it sucks, I hope this is helpful, if maybe a bit of tough love.

1) You can't tell people to 'git gud' and 'learn to adapt' while also admitting that you've been complacent in willfully stomping out competition. Perhaps some of the whining and angst directed your way wouldn't be happening today if you'd instead be waging war against peers - but that's just a thought experiment to mull over.

2) We used to play in a much different game, a harsher game that was more accepting of (seeming) random acts of violence and bloodshed for various motives, profit, revenge, fun, etc. But that isn't the game anymore, and it hasn't really been that way since early 2018. Some of us got heavily course-corrected into this new direction upon threat of losing IC toys and titles, and that's sort of the vibe I'm getting right now, if not like... 3-4 years late.

3) You mention that there's a lot of grudge and dislike for your group, and I know it can feel like you're being reactionary and escalating things in a logical manner from your personal viewpoint, but that's not how it's perceived elsewhere. If you're a carpenter who hammers nails all day, then rightfully so, you're going to have a reputation as being a carpenter. People don't like carpenters, the remember when they were the ones that got nailed down, and that dislike grows over time and spreads to others. Ultimately, at the end of the day, though, it's a case of 'you reap what you sow.'

If what you're putting forwards in character is violence, derision, and vitriol, then logically, you and your group are not going to be welcomed and have a flock of people being chummy. Perhaps your characters are great people once you get to know them, but you're pushing people away from ever getting to that point, and it's not something that is going to be a fixable matter over the course of a few weeks.

The only advice I could give is what has helped me get over my own BS - sometimes a break is needed, even if it isn't desired. Consider vacationing and playing a goofy goober character and experiencing something radically different. In my case, I simply chose to CP exit and take several months off the game. I wouldn't recommend that, it's something I regret doing (the CP exit part, specifically) but being away a solid chunk of a year was what I needed to come back with a clear head. I can't promise it'll help you, but I do hope you are able to work through things because yes, the game does need assholes and heels, they're what make things great - with moderation.

Ultimately, you do reap what you sow, and there have been many IC antagonists that have done awful things without causing such a collective groan on an OOC level.

The last major Syndicate war was way more lopsided in power balance, one of the strongest factions ever, was an absolute bloodbath with what has to be one of the most chy expensive instances of combat ever, and there was still less OOC complaining around it.

I'm not super keen personally on players getting shunned OOC for what amounted to routine play a few years ago, especially since conflict in the game has cooled so much since. I do think a lot of players have less appetite for it, and they should be able to tap out if they want to, but I don't think they should necessarily be the ones shaping the direction of the game.

@0x1mm

Perm them. Very difficult to do if they're experienced, only a handful of players will be willing to even attempt it, but solves all problems for good. Also leaves people attempting it open to the same treatment.

This could work, though when you're expecting your enemy to spend 6-8 months in the vats before popping back out, it can make it difficult. Admittedly, sometimes you die right before you need to sleep or go to work, or you're experiencing some bleed from it and decide to take a day or two off to cool your head.

Outlive them. Works every time if you're more patient and cautious than them. People have a habit of taking themselves off the board without outside interference, but requires a lot of willingness to live through a long stalemate.

I've had enemies that have done this, and it's always kind of sad to me that they do so before I get a chance to have a hand in their downfall or RP with them further.

@DiamondNine

If you want to experience more RP from your opponents when you do lose, then be a good victim. Some people will have experiences where a solo, or similar, will put in extra effort to make it entertaining, or at least try to do a job in a way that is less stressful for the victim.

I've certainly experienced this behavior from people who've killed my character, and it is appreciated, though it's hard to be a good victim when your character just gets ghosted, or seemingly killed for being in the wrong place at the wrong time without any chance to explain themselves during or after being killed.

Eventually, everyone can get max UE and be on the same play field.

While yes, everyone can in theory get to max UE, that doesn't automatically make them on the same playing field. A non-combat max UE character, unless they're in a very lucrative profession, very well connected, or topside, is ultimately at the whims of even mid to low range UE combat characters.

@TalonCzar

That said, if you really want to promote the health of the game- seriously- stop doing things yourself if it's not a challenge. Hire someone who has a realistic chance of failure to do the job for you.

This is an excellent suggestion. The first time I encountered it I was confused why the person would hire someone else to kill someone when they could do so easily, but it is a great way to spread the RP and wealth around and create situations where the intended victim can possibly survive the encounter.

Lastly. Sometimes you just have to live under the oppressive hand of the Big boys TM for a while. There's nothing wrong with there being a group of top end players who are scary as hell with not real competition. It can be themely. It only becomes a problem in my mind when these players use this position to stifle play instead of using it to enrich play.

I absolutely agree. It can be themely and some players and groups have done it very well, creating lots of RP and work for other PCs as well as those subtle fucking over of other PCs just enough to let resentment build over time to where they'll take that job your enemy gives them just because it's a chance to fuck with you.

I try to go out of my way to pick fights with characters my character would find annoying, or hold a grudge over some past slight and bully them a bit on pubSIC or make vague threats without actually doing anything to them, just so that as they grow in UE, power, influence, etc. they're more likely to take that job against my character, or find other characters that dislike my character and band together to fuck with me.

@eggsaresides

What most people do not know is, me and mine are chill as fuck. We, and me in particular, have been lenient and given others opportunities to get out of the shituation they have gotten themselves into, or even left them alone completely when the events involving them ended and there was no further reason to fuck with them.

This could very well be true, though I can't say I've seen evidence of this. Mostly the opposite.

This perception of an imbalance is bullshit. My circle is small. In comparison, there are a lot more of you than there are us.

This is true from a purely mechanical/numbers standpoint, though for most people it can be difficult because of timezones and schedules to coordinate two PCs, let alone three, four, etc.

It is not our problem that you did not invest in the appropriate systems to compete with us

I'm sorry but this just sounds like the kind of argument a min-maxer would use against people who don't min-max. Not to accuse you of doing so of course, but just to say it has that "git gud" type of vibe to it.

As far as becoming each other's competition goes, I have explicitly done this some months ago, separating myself from a group that had all the odds stacked in their favor from the mix on up. Together, me and this group controlled a large portion of the player base, there was no one that would oppose us, and those that did were strong-armed and killed before they could get any real power of their own because we were a group of experienced and resourceful people backed by powerful organizations and people across the city.

If you're referring to who and what I think you are, there were certainly people who did oppose them, and while a proverbial hand may have broken so as to not become a fist swinging against them soon, I can't recall any instances of that hand being outright cut off.

@batko

It's a lack of willingness to play the game in a way conducive to an OOCly friendly atmosphere while competing ICly. I have witnessed every other player group in the game intentionally expose themselves to consequences and considerable risk, instead of intentionally gaming the system in order to stay safe at all times. That's not because they're bad at the game, it's because the game is boring otherwise.

I have to agree with you here. Considerable risk that hasn't always played out in their favor, or hasn't been a very transparent ambush when none (or very few) of their enemies were around disguised as risk.

You're making yourself out to be the victim when your entire MO is, and has been for maybe a year now, to repeatedly and relentlessly vat people in groups whenever it is easy for you to do so, and then offer absolutely no recourse or chance at retaliation. That's not an honest argument to bring to the forums, and that fact that you refer OOCly to your character's friends the same way your character refers to them ICly tells me there's a lot of bleed going on that you shouldn't be entertaining.

The argument put forth does feel a bit in bad faith, considering that it isn't really representative of what people seem to be actually witnessing/complaining about.

When you decide that you want to Win Sindome you're doing so at the cost of everyone else's enjoyment of the game.

This feels like a great and concise summary. I'd love to give the benefit of the doubt and assume that no one playing is trying to Win Sindome, but when there are so many IC behaviors that seem to be done for OOC reasons/advantages, that benefit of the doubt can be difficult to maintain. Particularly so when a seemingly decent chunk of the community says they feel a certain behavior is harmful to the game as a whole, and are met not with "I didn't know people felt that way, I'll take it into consideration" or any sort of attempt to see things from their side but rather a "Y'all are brainwashed and wrong."

It's reasonable to expect that everyone has the same advantages and disadvantages at the start, and that there is not subjective advantages given to one side or the other. In effect it's reasonable to want conflicts to play out naturally. I think some of the problems now are because conflicts were interrupted before they could play out to their final conclusion, and now everyone is stuck in and endless embittered stalemate.

Players will often virtue signal about how they would never try too hard, while trailing a long history of doing just that when the roles were reversed. They will, in other words, construct narratives to support their view of their own rightness. The reality is this: Just about everyone involved in this cursed conflict has tried to permanently kill one another. If there was ever a point when it was a fair-is-fair tradeoff of cooperation that is years ago forgotten now. Everyone pulled out the stops, I know because I saw it first hand, and far from condemning it I welcomed and still welcome it. If fewer punches were pulled this thing would already be over: Mercy is not always a virtue.

I may be a minority voice in this regard, but at a certain level in the game the expectation should be that between veteran characters everyone is playing to their absolute best ability. I expect that of my opponents, and I have enough respect for them to do the same myself, not to be paternalistic and pat them on the head for trying and letting them having a win now and then, but trying to be the best and letting them claim that glory if they rise up bury me.

Players should absolutely be able to tap out of that kill-or-be-killed level of play, but I don't think they can really lay any claim to the high levels of the game or roles in that if they're not willing to engage. At some point there should be some part of the game where the training wheels come off, and where better than the parts of the game with all the prestige and resources?

I'm going to break out another thread from this because I've been meaning to write up a bit about what cooperative competition means, because I see a lot of people who just don't get it and they're pushing bad information.

Please give me a bit, I'll probably put it up in Theme.

@0x1mm

Frankly, I don't think you understand the realities of what is being discussed in this thread, because the behavior being discussed isn't even remotely similar to any of the names you listed. You are often quite right about a lot of problems being discussed, but right now I think you're being fairly tone deaf as a result of not being very involved in the conflict at hand in the first place.

If eggsaresides gets a pass on revealing information in order to bring his complaints to the table, maybe a similar post needs to be made opposing it, because so far I have seen many names in this thread simply gritting their teeth and attempting to bear with the difficulty of having to stay vague.

I think people have been doing a fine job keeping things vague while also addressing things. Egg didn't go crazy and start naming names or specific events. And he didn't need to. It's pretty obvious that there are people in this thread who knows what's being talked about and don't need to use specific IC examples to make their point. Thanks all.

Please put these people in a chatroom together and let them argue it out until they realize this shit happens on EVERY OTHER MULTIPLAYER GAME. You always have "elite" (using that word lightly) players who can shit on everyone else, some do so more than others for various reasons. I fail to see the complaint here. That group of players is building a story, just as much as you. They're obviously making waves enough that people bleed it OOC, on both sides. That sounds like fun. What are you complaining about? That you keep dying, in a MUD that's expressly PvP? This isn't a MUSH, this isn't Arx, this storytelling isn't cooperative. That doesn't make it any less of a story. It doesn't take away from the roleplay, it's just a different type. Competitive storytelling.

I have been seeing this same complaint for YEARS now. In all those years, only one player on the side of the "elite players" has remained a constant. Somebody whose character is just as easy to lure out as any other under the right circumstances, and who is far from min-maxed entirely for combat. One who gets fucked by NPCs just as much as sometimes rewarded.

So again, what exactly is the complaint? I've read this entire thread and it sounds to me like the complaint is this: a small subset of players are upset they haven't been able to kill this player, and they want staff to make it easier for them and their future characters because they believe this character presents an imbalance to the game as a whole? Have I hit the nail on the head?

Shit's not supposed to be balanced. It isn't fair. Welcome to Withmore.

"But adjusting how you play to fit the current style Syndicate conflict, is not how you have fun playing Sindome. Having a contest of who can watch camera networks longer is not fun. Fixers or other RP drivers simply don't want to go out and interact with lowbies and midbies because they know they'll get vatted the fourth time in a row without any meaningful retaliation or recourse occuring between the last three deaths. RP hubs die, plots die, and usually so do immies and non-combat characters completely unrelated to the issues at hand. Previous syndicate conflicts were bloody because they actually went out and fought eachother frequently instead of playing year-long waiting games and completely slaughtering all Red sector RP in the process." -Batko

I've been on this shit for years and still don't know how to properly quote this out, but changing how you roleplay IS part of your roleplay. You're not going to be able to host parties like you were when you're being hunted by somebody who can kill you. You're going to have to adjust. Oh no, poor RP hubs. They never existed to begin with, they're fluid. People will find RP. You can build your hub later.

You might be surprised to find that this high-level murder shit only serves to ENLIVEN Red RP. It doesn't kill it, it just kills it where you're currently focusing. Readjust your perspective. If it doesn't enliven it, it really has no affect on it at all. That is to say, this doesn't change how the normal newbie enters the game. Take it from one who constantly rerolls.

@Leech

Shit's not supposed to be balanced. It isn't fair. Welcome to Withmore.

Nobody here is asking for, or seems to have the expectation that SD will ever be fair and balanced. They're asking for suggestions on how to improve the current meta-environment IC, which is a meritorious thing to be trying to do.

There's a big difference between playing hard, or playing hard, or pushing theme and simply playing to win the game.

You can't win at SD.

Anti-competitive behaviors deserve to be called out.

SD as a RP game has objectively improved over the past 5+ years. This isn't because the game suddenly became carebear land and we all stopped PVPing one another. It's because staff pushed people to stop taking the easiest pathway to solve conflicts--murder--and start pushing RP that allowed people to better respond and continue the RP thread.

@Wulf

You're reiterating what people have been arguing for while simultaneously contradicting yourself. The thing being talked about is the perception of people powergaming themselves into "some pointless digital power fantasy." That's the entire thread.

Again, nobody's asking for tactical nukes and I-Win buttons. The most aggressive thing people asked for in terms of 'disrupting the natural order' was for NPC's to occasionally power-check high end players when they don't have any direct competition. And that isn't a wild or outrageous act to ask for. It's something that's been done for years in SD, and while it sometimes seriously stings to be on the receiving end, from what I've seen, it often doesn't usually happen totally unprompted or without reason.

As for the question of 'how do you compete when you can't know if the other side isn't rule-breaking?' The best you can do is put on your best face, put forth solid RP when you're able, and @note to notate things you see that seem out of place, weird or suspect.

@Leech

You clearly haven't read the thread nor know the context if you believe this is purely a bunch of bellyaching about UE disparities. This is about code abuse, smallworlding, and creating a complete RP wasteland in Red due to the actions of a few who wish to win the game like it's a hack-and-slash MUD rendition of a Postal game.

The fact that you've been absent yet have such strong opinions about this particular situation is a little silly to me, but to each their own. I think this thread was better off left alone on Slither's last post a couple weeks ago.

Playing as a group of shrouds with the same shortdescs to abuse multiples in combat, routinely sniffing random shrouds and killing them if they seem remotely player-like (ignoring hoodie mementos of course, they are obviously NPCs), getting triangulators nerfed into the ground because you can't go outside without pinging six people first, the list goes on. Nah, I think my assessment is totally fair. Your behavior has caused people in this thread to wonder why they even play the game, maybe you should reflect why that is.

I am more tolerant than most to unfair treatment and circumstances, but when I see how many players have echoed many of the same issues, then yes, I will point out shitty behavior with them on the forums. Even when outright told by those who are supposed to be your allies to cool your jets you continue your murderhobo tendencies, so pretending like you're a victim and clutching your pearls about how you offered peace IC is just disingenuous. Regardless of your IC actions, your propensity towards OOCly antagonistic gameplay remains, and that's what is being discussed, not the IC world.

I'm not interested in playing word games with you, Leech. If you'd like to misquote me and glean over obvious problem behaviors, fine. You can all ignore the complaints that have been brought up in this thread, clearly nothing is going to change and you're all okay with how things are going currently. No skin off my nose. But I'd like to repeat how interesting it is that you've been absent and have returned only to tenaciously take sides and make bad faith arguments in defense of problem behaviors in this thread.