Shattered Kingdoms

This!

Declaring war with a faction doesn't mean that every single time you login to your character, you're interested in PKing them, nor does it give you license to say that they're cheating because they don't stay logged in every single time that you spawn a bounty NPC. People have lives outside of the game, and the game doesn't center around you.

Not every single person plays the game for the same reasons that you do. Some people don't have the same amount of time to dedicate to the game that you do, and while you may only spend a fraction of your time hunting them down when they're the only tribunal member logged on, you might be doing so during the majority of the time that the other person is logged on. Assuming that you know everything about what someone wants from the game OOC because their faction declared war with yours IC is quite the stretch. It seems like you lack the ability to view things from the viewpoint of others, which, coupled with the fact that you clearly dedicate more time to the game than others, is a bad combination.

Not everyone can dedicate the same amount of time to the game as you do (which is probably a good bit judging from the amount of activity you've had just in these forums), and it's selfish and rude to demand that code changes be implemented to almost exclusively benefit people like you who have more time to dedicate to the game, while actively punishing people that don't have that same amount of time to play. Be respectful of other players.

I definitely understand now why Dulrik had to specifically ask you not to complain about necromancers. You get a notion in your head and you simply refuse to let it go. If they are not interested in PK, they can admit defeat and seek out a truce. Otherwise, a declaration of war is explicit consent to engage in PK.

I have given other players the benefit of the doubt. Otherwise, I would have lodged a complaint with the Rules Manager which I have not and do not intend to do. You are drawing conclusions based on assumptions. I think it is clear based on the poll results that about the community is evenly divided on this issue. I am glad that you finally decided to argue the merits of the OP instead of resorting to ad hominem attacks. Kudos for that.

My reasoning for why I think your idea is poorly thought out never changed.

+1 - in bold, above. - Torbellino, ~ March 2014. Was interested in PK, just not the slaughter fest that happened at the time. Stuck with it pretty long. Ultimately, admitted defeat and tried to just stay IC through that process, and make some RP with it. -
However, the way the game was/remains set up, that admission was bad for BOTH sides of the conflict. The losing side did deal with breaking off alliances and 0 coffers. The 'winning' side had a lot of characters retire soon after out of 'boredom,' instead of there being further interaction/RP, which could have sparked the next thing down the road. The plan was to take a couple months to rebuild and then reengage, with fresh members and leadership, likely on both sides.

A year later, March 2015. Again with the Guardians and the East. Sheer force of will to get the 'losing' side of that war effort to show up for the sake of the GRP and do something/anything that made sense, far as the PVP goes. Outcome improved - Ayamao still took a beat stick, due to some poor tactics. Again the war ends, with the 'victorious' easterners still taking some major hits. Haven't seen much further interaction.

In the near 3 years I've been at this gig, seems like when both sides have interested people to fight, and each side has at least one among them who can lead tactically, win or lose, it can be enjoyable, and the RP is there to support it. Imbalance seems to breed more negative OOC feedback, and it's funny to see it mostly coming from the 'winning' end of given conflict. And more funny, when that 'winning' side disappears in the game as much as the losing side. Something that did not actually change when staff tried to make a GRP with attainable goals/points and flexible outcome (There was a win and a lose scenario, but flexibility within depending on what actually happened.) I would have loved to see additional RP born out of the end of that conflict.

Anyway - on topic - bounty guards/coffers - it does make sense it'd take a day to deal with the bureaucracy of money being deposited, to guards being properly hired, and prepared to fight. Maybe an in-game day would make sense for that.

On the other topic of characters not engaging in PK when there's clearly enemy action in your cabal/kingdom - if there's RP behind it and it's established and consistent, it's one thing. If a player is picking/choosing fights and logging out to avoid combat, but returning later and goes out of their way to gank people 'in retribution,' then it's not so much a matter of them not wanting to PK (in general) but more of a meta-gaming thing/frowned upon behavior. And then there's those people who have RL interfering with their timing of the anything, that's less than ideal but - if there's some actual follow up later to engage in that PK opportunity, that'd make some degree of sense. A leader of a group could be made aware of a member's lack of patriotism. The leader can probably make the call if there's established reason/RP behind shirking from PK. If it's a leader doing this, check with the other leader to verify if it's reasonable (do to RP) or not. If it's a single leader, it should be reportable, at least to figure out 1) why, and 2) to get a (2nd) leader in the group to lead in the PK if the current one is not confident/willing/desiring/able. The game suffers when a group and its members aren't held accountable in this fashion. On the flip side, players should never assume out of the game that you can speak with authority on someone else's behavior or act as a policing unit in game, especially if your character hasn't done due diligence in game, RPwise. The OOC policing that goes on is frustrating both for the person doing it, and the person receiving it.