Shattered Kingdoms

Too late. The tears have already started to flow. I feel like Dulrik has been presented with a number of good options, though.

Yes because every opinion that is not ours is qq.

This is supposed to be a discussion.

Maybe those of us who have posted in the thread a great deal already should make room for other people to join it, then? I'm hands off on this one for now.

Sometimes the only defeat RP the enemy is willing to accept is deletion. I do not think this is against the rules, is it? It's not even uncommon. What is to stop people from declaring war strictly for loot? The winning side would eventually end up with everything, alts included.

I would interpret it as a violation of the Golden Rule, if you are unwilling to accept the surrender of an enemy. You can give them harsh or draconian terms of surrender, which they may refuse (letting you off the hook). However, I would penalize the leadership of a faction if they refused to even offer terms to an enemy that wanted to surrender.

Maybe surrender could be a new diplomatic status.

Just to try starting somewhere, I will propose a definition for hoarding of items that can be worn. If you are carrying (or holding in containers) more than half a dozen limited items, under this definition you would be hoarding. (Items currently being worn or wielded are exempt from calculation.)

Not sure where to even start a definition regarding non-wearable (including held-only) consumable items.

What if those items aren't typically ever worn but can be because of the item type? A weapon that serves as a key comes to mind. I've seen a grand total of 0 people trying to wield it as a weapon and 0 that have ever considered it. Not to say that someone might suddenly want to try after reading this, but there are a couple items like this. Would these items be considered held-only as their purpose isn't used in the way the item type was made?

By your definition an item cap seems the most logical solution.

Unfortunately, yes. The only reason you need most of that gear is to function in PK. The functional gear requirement for PvE is significantly lower and attainable, mostly, with purchasable items. If you have 0 hope of winning PK, and are losing PK encounters repeatedly - no, you should not have gear. You're not entitled to gear, and you can find some very trashy but well-desc'd gear if you just want to look pretty. If you have gear for RP, I have never encountered a situation where I've not seen an RP item returned (drums, dice, etc) to someone who used them. The only time I've seen useless gear spitefully junked is when someone earned it by being an insatiable [REDACTED], or a person didn't ask to have it left aside.

All of that doesn't mention how enchanting changes have severely lowered the cost of functional entry into PK.

The problem with the inn idea - and the only one, I see - is that 6 cities divided by the current active players can have someone knock out those hours on a weekend or two days off, and then they're free for the rest of the month. It's a good idea, but I don't think it will work without other steps taken. Of course, I really like my idea, but that's beside the point - it doesn't have to be my answer, just another answer to work with it. Tap rooms are not dangerous right now, and it would take more code-enforced wrangling to make them so. Most of Dulrik's changes over the past have gone to make cities more safe, not less safe - and attempted to shift PK to cabal encounters. I'm not sure going against that grain is an option, but if it is... it would go a long way to pushing a lot of other activity other than just dehoarding.

All in all, though, I still say the simplest and most effective (and most drastic) option is have the contents of containers count against item limits and don't let any items take up below 1 item.