Aaralyn Rekali said:To all THOSE at Objective B.
It sounds like Objective B is gone?
However, NPCs can't win objectives alone. Has to be PC involvement as with Manaan - Carach shutting off the Generator for example.
I haven't been able to really keep track of who has been destroying or doing what. This is why I don't like a flood of NPCs being used so much. Becoming sort've a grind against the story writing process.
Regardless, great job guys.![]()
Read the first line.Kira Liadain said:The NPC's have been used by PC's that are actually there to take the objectives.
I'm not sure where you are getting that no PC's have been used to take it down.
Ultimately, as long as the objectives are won and no prior statements have been said in the terms, it doesn't matter if it PC vs PC or PC with NPC vs PC with NPC.
Because ultimately, everything ends up being a writer vs another writer.
That's why we have the 24 hour rule since it is such a short invasion.
Well the question is posted - So we'll get a better defined ruling on it regardless. It's not about Invasion rules so much as taking away from other aspects of the GAME. You seem to misunderstand me as usual. I don't care as long as people are happy and if you can't tell, some are not. That isn't the concern for myself though and I've pointed them in the right direction.Kira Liadain said:Curious. There is nothing in the invasion rules that say that.
Ultimately, unless the rules will be changing on Chaos on specifically what constitutes as a win regardless of the terms discussed by both faction admins prior to any invasion, we have to go by what chaos invasion rules state and by what the discussed terms have been proposed.
And so far, the only requirement to win the invasion is to get 2/3 objectives.
And how one wins those objectives is ultimately left to the writers based on engagements and the 24 hr time limit.
No, I backed out of it.Avalore Eden said:There were no defined ...uh, rules, in the terms as far as how one wins an objective, whether it be through NPC use or direct PC interaction. It is something that can be looked into if it's causing enough of an issue.
I'm curious to see Tef's ruling on this if it was brought up as an issue in another invasion before.
Apparently you guys discuss terms and conditions of NPC engagement, ect.Avalore Eden said:Alright then.
Nevertheless, it's not a bad question to raise and is something that can be further defined in future invasion terms.
No, I'm not faulting you by the terms and conditions but I'm saying going forward - apparently we need to look at the definition of NPC usage and scrutinize their specifics on objectives then.Avalore Eden said:Well, according to how the terms were written out I suppose "anything goes" is really what we're looking at here.
I'm not familiar with the invasion that the issue was raised within before, so using NPC's to win an objective wasn't something I really thought of at the time. Most all invasions I've been a part of, personally, that used objectives to define a win was done with PC's while NPCs were background noise. Refining NPC use for objectives just wasn't something we thought of while discussing terms, as I guess we assumed it wouldn't be an issue?
Personally I'd prefer to see direct PC involvement in the objectives to win them, but seems that's not the case with this particular objective, currently. A bit late to go back and renegotiate terms, so at this point in time it is what it is. We'll keep this in mind moving forward, now that we have a good hold on just how big NPC use has become, and work on refining their use for the future.
Reminds me of Coruscant. :|Avalore Eden said:One PC vs PC Tournament Event Invasion, coming up!
Just kidding.
But it could be fun.