This post is meant to explain some of our conceptions of the Mageslayer title. Back in 2007 Drovis was made the first Mageslayer by Kastellyn. See link:

http://forums.carrionfields.com/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=31&topic_id=15236&mesg_id=15247&page=

It is apparent that Kastellyn's intent was to make the title a small perk for the non-leader character with the most Mage kills. It also seemed he intended it to change weekly as one character possibly overtook another in Mage kills.

I did not play Drovis. I did play in battle with him and he was a badass. But! If you read the death thread and most especially Kastellyn's comments, he wasn't always a "model" villager. In fact, he actually got booted from the village but earned his way back in. Considering all of this, it doeant appear to be a factor in his selection of Mageslayer.

Over time this title didnt get awarded on a weekly basis. It actually seemed to only be awarded when there was a clear front runner in Mage kills. I seriously do not think it was ever awarded to someone who did not have the most Mage kills in the cabal.

I have no problem with you imms changing the criteria for the Mageslayer but you have to understand why so many of us see it the way we do. I've had two mageslayers and I can say I made it a goal in both cases and tried hard to accomplish that goal based on those notions. You see, it seems to me that you've made the Mageslayer title to be based on what you think is a standout villager who wasn't a leader, which is what I have always thought that the "veteran" title was for. Coincidentially you have awarded both honors to the same character. This is nothing against Mauz. He's awesome. It's just my point of view on all of this.

Lastly, I had the belt too with Bartis! It wasn't a great item for him because of gates but damn I loved that belt and wore it proudly. I only wished it wasn't rot death cuz Yean stopped giving it to me after my third death. I miss her too! And Ysal!

..is that he kills predominantly mages. Let's do a little comparison of two ragers, Mauz and Lohakahn, one of which was titled Mageslayer.

Mauz: 68% mage kills
Lohakahn: 45% mage kills

Let's break it down at class level. Scaled deathfulness percentage is in parenthesis.

Mauz:

invoker 16 (2.2 %)
shapeshifter 14 (0.68 %)
warrior 9 (0.178 %)
transmuter 5 (0.465 %)
conjurer 4 (0.477 %)
bard 4 (0.443 %)
anti-paladin 2 (0.285 %)
necromancer 2 (0.525 %)
assassin 2 (0.133 %)
healer 2 (0.464 %)
thief 1 (0.104 %)
paladin 1 (0.184 %)
ranger 1 (0.068 %)

Lohakahn:

warrior 61 (1.2 %)
shapeshifter 60 (2.91 %)
invoker 10 (1.38 %)
conjurer 10 (1.19 %)
shaman 9 (2.33 %)
healer 8 (1.86 %)
berserker 8 (2.10 %)
bard 6 (0.665 %)
assassin 5 (0.334 %)
thief 4 (0.417 %)
anti-paladin 4 (0.570 %)
paladin 3 (0.551 %
transmuter 2 (0.186 %)
necromancer 2 (0.525 %)

Rearranging by scaled deathfulness (kills normalized with the total population of the class over the years) reveals clearly which one of these characters was reputed for killing mages in particular:

Mauz:

invoker 16 (2.2 %)
shapeshifter 14 (0.68 %)
necromancer 2 (0.525 %)
transmuter 5 (0.465 %)
conjurer 4 (0.477 %)
healer 2 (0.464 %)
bard 4 (0.443 %)
anti-paladin 2 (0.285 %)
paladin 1 (0.184 %)
warrior 9 (0.178 %)
assassin 2 (0.133 %)
thief 1 (0.104 %)
ranger 1 (0.068 %)

Lohakahn:

shapeshifter 60 (2.91 %)
shaman 9 (2.33 %)
berserker 8 (2.10 %)
healer 8 (1.86 %)
invoker 10 (1.38 %)
warrior 61 (1.2 %)
conjurer 10 (1.19 %)
bard 6 (0.665 %)
anti-paladin 4 (0.570 %)
necromancer 2 (0.525 %)
paladin 3 (0.551 %)
thief 4 (0.417 %)
assassin 5 (0.334 %)
transmuter 2 (0.186 %)

Based on statistics above, it is very clear that Mauz killed predominantly mages. Lohakahn, too, was quite deathful and could have had a slayer title if an Imm had wanted to reward him that way. I, however, don't really see why word mage should have been in front of word slayer in that title.

The mageslayer was until recently the best killer of mages in the cabal. While that leaves some room for interpertation when the race is close this race was nowhere near close.

Lohak 88 mage kills - 1.72 Gank
Mauz 43 mage kills - 2.14 Gank

Thats pretty much it. To me this is like installing someone as president who came in a distant 4th in the election just because the people who did the seating liked the way he ran his campaign and ignored all of the actual data in front of them.


As a side note the % of kills as mage should not be counted. That has so much to do with the composition of enemies and your build that you can't really filter that bias out. For instance a duergar warrior should see a lower mage kill % just because a lot more non village enemies will be coming after them as opposed to a N/N arial thief.

If I were to try and figure out who the best scorer in basketball is I am not going to go much further then the stat sheet for free throws, 2 pointers, and 3 pointers. Might argue about why the guy with more 3's and less free throws that is in a close second deserves the top spot but if that number one guy more then doubles number 2 it takes the wind out of pretty much any argument. Thats a ####ing huge difference.


Keep in mind up until now the system has worked. In this case the admin (mortal and immortal) failed hard in their duty to police Lohaks behavior. I don't think there needs to be any sweeping changes to the system this was just one instance where someone dropped the ball and tried to make up for it after the fact by denying a reward. Unfortunatly in doing so they undermined the legitamacy of the reward.

in doing so they undermined the legitamacy of the reward

I can't believe people are still talking about this.

It's not worth the hassle.

So long, and thanks for all the fish!

Sometimes I'm amazed you haven't shut the whole game down. Forum warriors constantly sound like CF is just the bane of their existance. As if they don't have a choice in if they play or not.

I think what everyone is really trying to do is yet again understand the logic and the formula to receive both recognition and rewards.

I was just speaking in general. I don't see much in the way of nonsense in this thread particularly.

There is always the easy routes of playing for fun or not playing though. Stupid XBox and its stupid achievement culture.

>Stupid XBox and its stupid achievement culture.

Are you knocking my gamerscore?
http://live.xbox.com/en-US/Profile?gamertag=Zulghinlour

So long, and thanks for all the fish!

Get off that ####ing xbox and get back to cracking bugs. Jesus christ man, what do you live off PBF donations and just bauks all day?

haha sorry, that is just a ridiculously high score.

Also, I don't envy you the number of Xbox live friend requests you're about to get flooded with.

>Get off that ####ing xbox and get back to cracking bugs.
>Jesus christ man, what do you live off PBF donations and just
>bauks all day?

I actually work in Xbox...so no, I'm not living off PBF donations and playing Xbox all day.

>Also, I don't envy you the number of Xbox live friend requests
>you're about to get flooded with.

Xbox limits you to 99, and I'm in the 80's.

So long, and thanks for all the fish!

Are you one of the leprechauns in the box that make the game appear on my screen? Did you choose fire giant to compensate for IRL miniscule size?

"Kinect Launch Team"?

I don't know what that means but if you work for xbox and you're involved with kinect - that's pretty damn cool. I love me some future tech.

Splntrd

I feel the same way about cabals. It's not worth the hassle.

The solution is pretty straight forward: Transparency.


This is a gripefest about people being upset that they had formed expectations over several years and admin deciding to change qualification without notice.

The solution is pretty stright forward: Don't form expectations.

>The solution is pretty straight forward: Transparency.

I disagree. I could tell you exactly why I do everything and people would still bitch and moan because they still think they deserved it. The reality is the transparency is "I watched this guy, and felt he deserved it". Within that explanation is a lot of people you didn't watch who will feel slighted, not to mention the people you did watch that you didn't think were worthy who will bitch because they think they are deserving.

>This is a gripefest about people being upset that they had formed
>expectations over several years and admin deciding to change
>qualification without notice.

The game changes, rewards change, the immortal staff changes. I'm not even sure how you'd serve notice that Kastellyn feels different than Fjarn feels different than Thror feels different than Boltthrower feels.

>But yeah you are right if you don't want to be held accountable to
>things then don't go out setting expectations.

Think of it more as a jaded immortal taking and Occam's razor approach.

>Personally I would love to see a battle imm come out and say in the
>future the mageslayer will be the best mage killer but thats not
>going to happen because then that would be a standard that players
>could hold them accountable to and they don't want to have to worry
>about that (instead of just staying with the standard or announcing
>changes to it AHEAD of time)

Actually if that's what they want it's easy enough to code it and just do that. However, that just cheapens this sort of reward in my opinion.

So long, and thanks for all the fish!

I realized I was being over the top and edited by post before your response was published.

For what its worth Zulg you are the king of transparancy and I think the design of Empire shows it and I really like that. I think the worst cabal in terms of transparancy is fort (how many decades before morts can promote?)

>I realized I was being over the top and edited by post before
>your response was published.

Woot!

>For what its worth Zulg you are the king of transparancy and I
>think the design of Empire shows it and I really like that. I
>think the worst cabal in terms of transparancy is fort (how
>many decades before morts can promote?)

I think there is value in both...

Empire is basically automated, and needs very little Immortal intervention (and receives very little in the way of Immortal attention)

Fortress has a more hands on approach, has a bunch of Immortals who watch over and promote & reward.

So long, and thanks for all the fish!

How's this for transparent? Mageslayer will not be a reward that I give out in the future.

I'm going to strongly urge Fjarn to do the same.

It's not worth the hassle. But hey! Fjarn's his own man, maybe he'll be happy to entertain the bitch fest.

Great job guys!

It boggles my ####ing mind.

In fairness both sides are being juvenile.

I think that wailing and screaming "I want a cookie! I want a cookie!" is not a good way to get a cookie.

Removing MageSlayer title is a valid option for addressing Laxman's concerns. However, there is also another option that fills his criteria and addresses the Immortal concerns. The solution is following:

-When a solid rager worthy of the reward holds most mage kills in the cabal, that rager is awarded the MageSlayer title.
-When the Commander, Drillmaster or a rager not worthy of the reward holds most mage kills in the cabal, MageSlayer title is not awarded to anyone.

This way, there will no longer be concerns about the cheapening of the MageSlayer title nor will there be concerns about awarding a crappy rager with the title.

There comes a point, as an imm, where some particular aspect of the game is way more of a headache to you than it's worth.

At that point, your options are:

1) Get rid of that one thing, or
2) Get burned out on the whole game.

I know this because I've been there a lot of times before.

Ouch! This wasn't the outcome I had in mind when starting this thread. Actually, I wasn't expecting to change anything with it. This is a real big disappointment. I hope you change your mind sometime and didn't take any of what I said to be bitching.

Because I could totally see this coming as a result of the Quas/Laxman/Oldril crew still complaining about this.

In doing so you will no longer devalue the effort that all previous mageslayers put into actually being the best killer of mages in the village.

I mean, christ, wake the #### up.

1) Imms give ####ING REWARDS. Not play into egomaniacs. If you don't know what a reward is, look it up.

2) Did you honestly think your bitching will net you a clear 'yea, I'm going to reward this douchebag for his douchiness'?

Jesus. If you want instant gratification or reward for being a stupidass ####bag, go play WOW.

I actually thought Cyradia's rant had merit. Now, it seems to be only a tool for idiots to gripe about everything that they perceive that THEY should know.

There's a reason for the lack of transparency. And it's NOT to screw you (plural) over, despite your (plural) paranoid delusions.

At least funnyone's gripes are juvenile and don't poke and prod and twist.

Thanks. You just keep on doing your awesome thing, Zulg. ^_^

Shady stuff is always gonna get discussed. Especially when it comes to Battle. Double especially when it comes to Jerrokrar, and triple especially when it involves the handing out of rewards, also quadrupley so when it involves pk stats.

You are really surprised by this?

I'm surprised there's anyone who feels like there's anything to say on this topic that wasn't already said several times several days ago, yeah.

for real yo

They're really the only two obsessing over their view of what SHOULD have been with Mageslayer, and being vocal about it. Everyone else chiming in seems mostly to be backing with you guys.

That's bound to affect his gank-o-meter, so it is not a very effective gauge. Unless you are in the Quas camp of mageslayers having to get the mage kills via skirmish instead of siege, that is.

Let's re-analyze your numbers again. We'll bring a third character to table too, also with unragerly behaviour but with enough mage kills to trump both of these. We pretend that these three are contemporaries, for simplicity.

Mharlndarn, Scion leader with 96 mage kills.
Lohakahn, dubious rager with 88 mage kills - 1.72 Gank
Mauz, solid rager with 43 mage kills - 2.14 Gank

Mageslayer = solid rager with most mage kills.

-Lohakahn is not a solid enough rager and has enough mage kills for the title.
-Mharlndarn is not a rager and has enough mage kills for the title.
-Mauz has enough mage kills for the title.

Mauz becomes the mageslayer.

If the rager behaviour doesn't matter at all, as long as he kills a lot of mages, then we might as well forget the condition of being a rager as well. Let us analyze the trio again.

-Mharlndarn, 96 mage kills.
-Lohakahn, 88 mage kills.
-Mauz, 43 mage kills.

Mharlndarn becomes the mageslayer.

You are entitled to your opinion, but Imm stance presented here has pretty much been "I. Will. Not. Reward. Crappy. Rager. Behavior." and Thror has denied your objective criteria of mageslayer simply being the rager with most mage kills, behaviour be damned. Solid rager with most PK wins gets the mageslayer, the ones with crappy rager RP will be ignored. It's quite as simple as that.

Jerrokrar has the PK skills and courage to go to the pillar. It only remains to be seen if he can RP a rager well enough to do so. Lohakahn fell short in these RP aspects, not following the limitations a rager has well enough to become mageslayer or reach the pillar.

I can appreciate your enthusiasm and the manner in which you present your information. It's not insulting like some of the other information presented on the boards.

However;

Things do change. I can understand if people get all riled up over the change but that doesn't mean I'm not going to forge ahead. The point here is that in the thread you posted, Kastellyn specifically states he is going to 'probably recycle that title on a weekly basis.'

The fact is, he isn't here, recycling the title on a weekly basis. Fjarn and other Battle Imms are running the cabal. We will run it in the manner that we feel is necessary.

When I was fully in charge of battle prior to my hiatus, I had a Commander, Drillmaster, Captain. The Captain position no longer exists. I respect that my peers felt the need to remove it. I presume Kastellyn and Yean will respect how Fjarn, I and others shape the Battle cabal in today's CF.

This sense of entitlement (despite how severe we do or do not police the cabal) is a little ridiculous from the "vocal minority' of the playerbase. I'm not going to justify or set a series of criteria for every title, reward, perk I determine is worth giving out.

We're not going to be e-bullied, or out-voted into changing our minds on this. It's a dead horse that has been butchered by an ranger and pissed on by an Orc.

That's the end of story on this topic.

I can appreciate your desire to change the system. I even appreciate to some degree the logic you have in place regarding how Battle is run.

What I think you are missing is that everyone in this thread is only pointing out how the change you enacted was not known to anyone in the playerbase until the last few days. I don't think that a sense of entitlement as you so defensively call it, I think it is the playerbase using the available information they had.

You do realize that not a single mortal was aware of this change, and that players were going off the only available information we had, right?

The only reason this would upset you is if you thought you were entitled to it because of some magic formula, but didn't get it when you thought you should have.

Frankly, I don't see that anything changed. I see a single quote from Kasty in a pbf, and a bunch of assumptions and anecdotes from people with different interpretations. If you haven't been the one making the decision, how can you be absolutely sure that it worked the way you assumed in the first place?

I'm done with this, so you get the last word. I think I've put way too much energy into what's basically amounted to trying to convince a rock that it's a tree.

-The only reason this would upset you is if you thought you were -entitled to it because of some magic formula, but didn't get it when -you thought you should have.

I don't think anyone is really upset, and the feedback you guys received really isn't just from one Kasty quote. It's from years and years of multiple player consistent experiences. I think the cutoff is the fact that it seems like one bad apple is spoiling the bunch.

Instead of you guys being like THAT ISNT HOW IT WORKS THIS IS NOT A REWARD GIVEN TO JUST ANYONE due to Jerrokrar F'ing it up, just say simply 'the guy was a douchebag and we kept it from him, if you aren't a douchebag it will continue to work as it always has'. (which by the way is rager with most mage kills gets a belt and title. =P..)

Because again here is someone saying it better than I did but saying the same thing.

Good post Jalim.

Just kidding

Figured some person had to say it and I pre-empted the trolls

Didn't you have Commander, Captain, *General*, and Drillmaster?

I feel like Captain was in charge of defense of the Village, General of offense, and Drillmaster for tactics (all when the Commander wasn't on).

Alright, that's all. Figured I had to poke fun at the old dwarf's memory (or mine, if I'm wrong).

Only three sir! Drillmaster was in charge of offense, Captain of Defense and Commander of the whole.

That being said, I remember a General from something but I can't quite place my finger on it. Maybe the it was General rather than Captain? That whole trio concept came up when BoltThrower, Kastellyn, Holtzendorff and I decided to break the Village up into Berserkers/Defenders/Scouts.

Wasn't Torakkel a General back then? I remember a general back then too, but it seemed less frequent than the others.

For a while it was Commander, General and Captain. There was no drillmaster. This was in the Loborguz and year or so following time. Drillmaster came later.

Dio's graveyard shows Kolun as Drillmaster 2mo before, and Lohrn, then myself as Rhuean just after. That's not saying *LOBORGUZ* didn't have a Drillmaster, but the position was there. Also, there were multiple General of Wars from 2002 to 2004.

Thanks to both you and Fjarn for the responses. I wasn't expecting to persuade you to do things differently. I just felt obligated to share my perspective with you.

However, I think it would be amazing if mageslayers got an ability called fashion belt.
And they could make the belt instead of it being given to them. It would save you from having to give it to the mage slayer
(except the first time) because its awesome having a battle imm giving you the mageslayer belt and title.

With my mageslayer, I felt awesome to have gotten the title and the belt.
But felt awkward having to ask for the belt when i lost it.

The position had no authority, no powers, no bonuses, nothing. It was a title used to indicate an influence and teaching of tactics within Battle, given to me by Thror as a fitting title after being runner-up in the Rites.

Drillmaster is now chosen by the Commander, it has power and prestige, and is a recognized cabal leader position with relevant perks.

Things change. Deal with it.

I'm glad the imms did not recognize sad-ass, boot-worthy Lohakhan with Mageslayer. He didn't deserve it. Yes, one of the criteria is magekills. But the overarching criteria is Villager worthiness.

If you aren't a worthy villager and there are 2 mortal leaders, and at least 4 immortal leaders, all of whom have the ability boot you, and not a single one does, and you CON die the bloody character, to me that means you deserve any rewards in the cabal because you are in it.

Apparently its ok to stay in the cabal as a ####ty villager, just not get rewards, that seems odd, to me.

edit there are people on the tablet with ####ty pbf comments too fyi

nt

For all its worth.

nt.

I don't know why you choose to be so obstinate.

nt

-----------------
"My view of Borkahd IC"
If you anger him, he'll rape you to death, eat your flesh, and sew your skin into his clothing. And if you're very, very lucky, he'll do it in that order. ~Twist

I guess I'll bludgeon this dead horse again. I'm sleep-deprived and more than a little irritated that I'm working yet another weekend, so take my comments in context.

I. Will. Not. Reward. Crappy. Rager. Behavior.

I don't care what you think you deserve or how it was done back in 2007 or 1999. On the plus side, that still leaves an opportunity to get rewarded from someone else, since the other imms are welcome to do as they see fit. It just won't come from me.

This is especially true if you're gaming the system and deliberately exploiting my goodwill .

Guys, the problem with having explicit and objective criteria for rewards of any kind is that some people will skirt the rules to get them at the expense of the enjoyment of other players. You really, really don't want that to be encouraged. That seems obvious to me, but then I live with a 2-year-old.

As I said before I'm ok with you not rewarding behavior you see as crappy. My only intent on that post was to point out there is a concrete reason and precedent for how some of us viewed Mageslayer. Until now that was all the information about the title thosr of us who cant see behind the imm curtain had. I believe the title was installed while Thror was still away and I don't know about your background. For all I know you might have been a big fort player pre-fjarn so I thought I'd give a little background of the genesis of Mageslayer and say this is why we believe it was done that particular way.

it was

Fair enough. I haven't played Battle exclusively, but Battle's my love, my pride, my joy. I've seen it through some big changes with the advent of neo-ragers back in what..'01 or something? I've seen lots of good and lots of bad. I might not have racked up the hours that some of you guys have, but I've definitely got enough years under my belt to call myself an experienced Battlerager player.

My opinion of Mageslayer hasn't changed as a mort or immortal. I've always thought (even before peeking "behind the curtain") that it was an honor bestowed by the gods upon the most worthy of Battleragers. Lethal, yes, but worthy also. I'm sure there are plenty of examples where this was not the case, but that's a brief look at where I'm coming from.

I was never trying to question anything about your relation to the battle cabal. I'm pretty sure you trump me in the resume department. As I said above I'm simply sharing my perspective. I'm ok with the change. And now that I've been heard, thank you for the response.

I agree. MS to me was always a title given to the villager with the most skulls piled up in his/her hut and who -wasn't- an asshat. Being a model villager was the 1st req. In the case of the character in question I think giving him the title would have been a huge slap in the face to what the village is.

Still not sure how he kept a hut that long but thats for a different thread :p

People complaining about changing criteria and not announcing the change is ridiculous and trivial.

-----------------
"My view of Borkahd IC"
If you anger him, he'll rape you to death, eat your flesh, and sew your skin into his clothing. And if you're very, very lucky, he'll do it in that order. ~Twist