Two-week freeze on PvP?

**Aanker** · December 31, 2010, 03:21 AM

Hello,

In light of recent disturbing events, such as the repeated breaking of PvP rules and general misbehaviour, as it seems, on the server, I am hereby suggesting a complete and total two-week freeze on any and all PvP activities to investigate allegations of severe war crimes and abuse. It is completely disappointing to me that some people - and I believe these players know exactly who they are - have such little regard of rules that they, themselves, helped vote for and establish. The recent chaos that has erupted as a consequence of the consistent rule breaking by some individuals is a defeat to the server as a whole, and a much stronger response must be made against those who have continued violating the establishments of this server.

In the interest of the reader, I have tried to present a list of the rule violations involved, so as to give the server an image of the tragic state of PvP at the moment:

Griefing, placement of TNT inside someone else's structure
Teleporting to and from an enemy, or within sight of a battle
Combat before the initial ceasefire of any declaration of war has expired (24 hours)

Please discuss this proposal from a non-diplomatic view. I have note that people seem to bring the conflicts and wars on the server to the forums, a most severe development and altogether unnecessary.

Thank you,
Aanker

**Dewy** · December 31, 2010, 03:43 AM

I say no to a freeze on pvp. There will always be rules broken especially in war where it's hard to determine where and when rules are broken. I think a better way is: if we convict someone of war crimes they should be banned from pvp for a set amount of time as well as their punishment for braking the rules voted by the community.

**Mangerman** · December 31, 2010, 03:48 AM

I'd say, we start with a clean slate. We forget about what rules have been broken by some people and left unpunished up till now, and start over. Any violations from now on should be punished swiftly.

**Aanker** · December 31, 2010, 03:51 AM

I can agree to what Mangerman said, but Dewy's proposal is also good. Either way, some form of sharper consequence is needed from this point...

**Ascarona** · December 31, 2010, 07:52 AM

Originally Posted by Aanker

Griefing, placement of TNT inside someone else's structure
Teleporting to and from an enemy, or within sight of a battle
Combat before the initial ceasefire of any declaration of war has expired (24 hours)

The first rule was broken by your own and was an accident, I found it rather strange that he asked if he could clean it up and then hid behind the TNT and shot arrows at us but it was still broken by one of your own.

Again, the Dwarves massively broke this one and there is a debate on wheter or not Akar broke that rule too.

And yeah we broke this one, Akar should have waited before leading us onto Orzammar.

Originally Posted by Dewy

I say no to a freeze on pvp. There will always be rules broken especially in war where it's hard to determine where and when rules are broken. I think a better way is: if we convict someone of war crimes they should be banned from pvp for a set amount of time as well as their punishment for braking the rules voted by the community.

I like this proposal, but then we'd need a war council

.

**Poach** · December 31, 2010, 07:55 AM

Or the standard voting procedure, Asc. As I suggested in the other thread, just ignore the opening spats: rules were broken by both sides in the initial excitement. There's no need to ban PvP for two weeks, are the Dwarves wanting a respite?

**Aanker** · December 31, 2010, 08:03 AM

Originally Posted by Poach

Or the standard voting procedure, Asc. As I suggested in the other thread, just ignore the opening spats: rules were broken by both sides in the initial excitement. There's no need to ban PvP for two weeks, are the Dwarves wanting a respite?

It is related to the fact that I have heard of or seen enough rule breaking already. As Mangerman suggested, I will from this point look very seriously on rule breaking and I hope that others will, as well.

@Ascarona: since the fight took place before the initial ceasefire had ended, it was technically not a battle, thus I find the alleged teleportation of less value than the lack of an entire 24 hours of ceasefire. It is a minor technicality, but I believe you understand.

**Makrell** · December 31, 2010, 09:09 AM

LOL. First time dwarves are in a 1v1 war and they want to quit it.
Of course there will be rule violations as both sides did. In all the war until now there has been NUMEROUS rule violations and these are in no aspect worse than what we have seen before

**nhytgbvfeco2** · December 31, 2010, 09:11 AM

when did we violate rules?

**Makrell** · December 31, 2010, 09:17 AM

Originally Posted by nhytgbvfeco2

when did we violate rules?

I have no idea, but we better keep this diplomatic

**Poach** · December 31, 2010, 09:19 AM

He refers to the violation of the 24hr ceasefire rule last night. The opposition are also annoyed that the Dwarves broke the TP rule regarding ongoing battles. The Dwarves say that the opposition's rule breaking is worse. In my opinion, one broken rule does not allow for more broken rules and both parties are equally at fault and, as such, we should simply ignore it as much of it occured during the opening excitement of the war.

**Makrell** · December 31, 2010, 09:32 AM

Originally Posted by Poach

He refers to the violation of the 24hr ceasefire rule last night. The opposition are also annoyed that the Dwarves broke the TP rule regarding ongoing battles. The Dwarves say that the opposition's rule breaking is worse. In my opinion, one broken rule does not allow for more broken rules and both parties are equally at fault and, as such, we should simply ignore it as much of it occured during the opening excitement of the war.

I agree

**King Sama** · December 31, 2010, 10:17 AM

Originally Posted by Ascarona

Again, the Dwarves massively broke this one and there is a debate on wheter or not Akar broke that rule too.

When? Josst said he was just doing repairs after Akar accidently placed tnt, and since there seemed to exist a ceasefire until I walked there, I didn't see you guys having any problem with this... or even any PvP going on at that moment

I would ask you guys to please clarify your charges in the proper thread.

As for freeze on PvP, I don't really care but I won't be an "Opt-in" for long if this sorry state doesn't improve. So do what you have to really.

Originally Posted by Makrell

LOL. First time dwarves are in a 1v1 war and they want to quit it.
Of course there will be rule violations as both sides did. In all the war until now there has been NUMEROUS rule violations and these are in no aspect worse than what we have seen before

Everyone hates us. Everytime we've joined a war people have spent hours complaining about us. Half the peoplle here are already heavily biased against us so there can be no proper rule judgement. I have yet to see one proper dwarven breach of the rules in this conflict while I have seen/heard of several on the other side=/

**Makrell** · December 31, 2010, 10:30 AM

Originally Posted by King Sama

Everyone hates us. Everytime we've joined a war people have spent hours complaining about us. Half the peoplle here are already heavily biased against us so there can be no proper rule judgement. I have yet to see one proper dwarven breach of the rules in this conflict while I have seen/heard of several on the other side=/

LoL, i dont think there was a Enurmous consensus againt dwarves in the dwarven squek war, was probably the only reason more measures were not made

Andthis is no all going consensus, this is just people getting annoyed that youre intervention policy is making diplomacy and pvp impossible

Its weird actually most people seem to hate us up untilø now, refreshing to see a change

**Ascarona** · December 31, 2010, 10:45 AM

Originally Posted by King Sama

When? Josst said he was just doing repairs after Akar accidently placed tnt, and since there seemed to exist a ceasefire until I walked there, I didn't see you guys having any problem with this... or even any PvP going on at that moment

I would ask you guys to please clarify your charges in the proper thread.

Akar placed 1 TNT block when he tried to shoot Joss after TPing for the 4th time. It was an accident, Joss wanted to clean up the TNT he placed in Mitch's hall but we have already established that if you don't want anything to do with the battle then you need to get out of the warzone.

Everyone hates us. Everytime we've joined a war people have spent hours complaining about us. Half the peoplle here are already heavily biased against us so there can be no proper rule judgement. I have yet to see one proper dwarven breach of the rules in this conflict while I have seen/heard of several on the other side=/

Yeah that tends to happen when you can't resist to intervene in everything.

Originally Posted by Makrell

Its weird actually most people seem to hate us up untilø now, refreshing to see a change

It sure is

.

**Aanker** · December 31, 2010, 11:03 AM

I hardly believe that if it came down to a poll on rule breaking, the dwarves would be outvoted, Sama. The fact of the matter is that most people here - or at least I hope so - are able to judge neutrally on rule violations and not take existing alliances and bonds into consideration.

**Selukon** · December 31, 2010, 11:07 AM

Originally Posted by Aanker

I hardly believe that if it came down to a poll on rule breaking, the dwarves would be outvoted, Sama. The fact of the matter is that most people here - or at least I hope so - are able to judge neutrally on rule violations and not take existing alliances and bonds into consideration.

I think to many people are biased one way or another, tbqh.

**Musthavename** · December 31, 2010, 11:20 AM

This game needs nuclear arms. If things went well, everyone would refuse to attack each other, thus there'd be no complaining. If things went badly, everyone's lands would be worthless, and thus there'd be no need to trespass or tp to them to complain about.