Prerequisites for Justice: Fixing Fundamental Flaws Before Reforming MO2’s System

Jan 5, 2025
63
14
8
Mortal Online 2’s justice system has become a breeding ground for the very behaviors that undermine its potential for growth and immersion. Griefing and exploitation aren’t fringe activities—they’ve become woven into the game’s culture, driving away new players and transforming many tenacious ones into griefers themselves. This isn’t just bad for new player retention; it’s a vicious cycle that reinforces the game’s insularity.

But addressing these issues isn’t just about implementing reforms—it’s about confronting the core barriers that make reform impossible. Before meaningful change can occur, Star Vault must first address fundamental flaws in the game’s mechanics that cripple any attempt at justice reform.

Criminal by Default: How Broken Mechanics Punish Lawful Players and Empower Griefers


Star Vault, the current justice mechanics in Mortal Online 2 don’t just fall short—they actively sabotage lawful players while empowering griefers to exploit every loophole. Two examples stand out: the “must enable criminal actions” mechanic for AOE abilities, and the nonsensical criminalization of necromancy.

1. AOE Abilities: A Trap for Lawful Players

Right now, any lawful player wanting to use AOE abilities—be they mage spells, necromancer skills, or tamed creature attacks—must enable criminal actions. This sets off a chain reaction of absurdities that leaves lawful players utterly vulnerable:
  • Griefers deliberately position themselves to be splashed by the AOE. Not that they even need to, given the game's utter absence of meaningful punishment for this behaviour, one could argue that this merely adds insult to injury. However, if the justice system is ever to be rendered meaningful, then this needs to be addressed as a prerequisite. So here’s the kicker: the griefer doesn’t even have to be grey. In fact, they’re almost always blue, thanks to how laughably easy it is to clear grey or red status. Once splashed, they can attack the lawful player without consequence, as the system marks the lawful player as the criminal.
  • The lawful player can’t even give a murder count if killed. Why? Because the system sees the griefer as acting “lawfully.” The hapless mage or tamer, on the other hand, is flagged as the criminal, making the victimizer appear as the victim.
  • This mechanic is easily exploited. A griefer can intentionally provoke this situation over and over, knowing the system will punish the lawful player and protect their own status.

2. Going Grey = Murder Count for Others’ Actions

If a lawful player accidentally goes grey—say, by unintentionally hitting a teammate or another lawful player due to the “criminal actions” mechanic—the consequences are nothing short of absurd. Consider this real example:
  • A group of players ventures into the Fabernum sewers. One player, a mage, has “criminal actions” enabled to use their AOE abilities. During the fight, they accidentally hit a teammate, turning grey.
  • The group finds a quiet corner and waits five minutes for the grey status to expire. The mage turns blue again, and all seems fine.
  • Later, the group is ambushed and killed by a notorious red. However, back at the priest, the game only offers a murder count option against the mage—now blue and innocent again! The red, who slaughtered the group, isn’t even mentioned.
This isn’t an isolated incident. It’s a certainty that the system prioritizes accidental or system-driven infractions over actual murders, creating scenarios that are nonsensical at best and rage-inducing at worst.

3. Necromancers: Criminals by Default

As if AOE users didn’t have it bad enough, necromancers are flagged as criminals simply for existing. Every necromantic spell or ability is apparently deemed “illegal,” regardless of context. While this might make sense in a lore-driven PvE game like ESO, it’s utterly ridiculous in a non-consensual PvP game like MO2.
  • Necromancers are flagged grey the moment they use their abilities, opening them up to attack from anyone—even lawful players.
  • Griefers can exploit this mechanic to freely attack necromancers in any situation, knowing the system gives them carte blanche.
  • There’s no distinction between lawful and unlawful necromancers. A player could be casting a spell in a dungeon with friends and still be flagged grey, purely because of the game’s inability to separate lore from justice mechanics.

A System Broken Beyond Repair

These examples highlight a systemic failure to distinguish between player-to-player justice and NPC-driven mechanics. Instead of creating a balanced system that discourages griefing, MO2’s current mechanics actively encourage it by punishing lawful players for using their abilities while giving griefers all the tools they need to exploit the system.

What Needs to Change

  1. Decouple AOE abilities from criminal actions. Lawful players should be able to use their abilities without being flagged for incidental damage. Simply make other blues unaffected by the splash damage. Yes I know that this opens up other avenues of abuse, because what's a game mechanic without players finding some way to exploit and abuse it, right? However, that's a bridge that one can cross when one comes to it. Regardless, without addressing this issue, MO2 will not, because it cannot, have a functional justice system!
  2. Stop treating necromancy as inherently illegal. Necromancers should only be flagged for harming other players unlawfully, not for playing their class, except possibly in a pure player to NPC type of context.
  3. Overhaul murder counts and grey status. Ensure that actual criminals—those who kill or attack other players unlawfully—are the ones penalized, not accidental greys or lawful victims.

The Bottom Line

Mortal Online 2’s justice system isn’t just broken; it’s actively working against the principles of fairness, immersion, and player-driven balance. Until these mechanics are addressed, the game will continue to alienate lawful players and empower griefers.

Star Vault, we’re not asking for hand-holding or safe zones. We’re asking for a system that works. One that punishes actual criminals, not victims. One that supports lawful playstyles instead of sabotaging them. One that makes sense in the context of a hardcore, non-consensual PvP game.

Let’s fix this.
 
Last edited:
Jan 5, 2025
63
14
8

The Justice System is a Joke—And Here’s Why That Matters

I keep mulling this over, and the more I do, the clearer it becomes: this system isn’t just flawed in isolated ways—it’s fundamentally structured to reward antisocial behavior while punishing lawful play.

So that raises a bigger question—not just how it’s broken, but why it was designed this way in the first place.

The AOE Criminality Problem: You’re a Criminal for Playing the Game

One of the most glaring examples is the AOE criminality mechanic. The more I think about it, the more absurd it seems that a lawful player can be forced into criminal status simply by using their abilities as intended. The fix should be obvious: if criminal acts are disabled, AOE splash damage shouldn’t hit lawful players—just like how direct damage is currently blocked.

Now, I know that the way SV’s system currently works, it doesn’t just cancel damage—it cancels the entire action, aside from the visuals. So yes, under the existing implementation, an AOE spell that would hit a blue player gets nullified entirely, instead of just sparing lawful targets.

Well, sorry SV, but you can’t just rely on toggling flags on and off to fix every problem. The actual solution is simple: let AOEs hit hostile targets (criminal players and mobs) while excluding blues.

Does that create potential for new exploits? Of course. But certainly no more than the current system. And here’s a radical thought: instead of retroactively patching everything with knee-jerk quick fixes, how about we deal with exploits as they arise—within the framework of a coherent, well-designed system instead of layering broken mechanic on top of broken mechanic?

The system doesn’t just fail to prevent griefing—it actively facilitates it by opening lawful players up to all kinds of exploits. The entire burden of caution is placed on blue players, while griefers deliberately engineer situations to turn blues grey.

It’s a game within the game—except only one side gets to play. Lawful players are forced into a constant state of paranoia, tiptoeing around mechanics designed to trip them up, while griefers gleefully manipulate the system for free kills. And then, when blues inevitably get caught in these traps, the same griefers sneer:
"Learn to play!"
"Learn the game!"

No, mate—we know the game. We just want it to stop rewarding you for gaming the system.

The Necromancer Farce: A Morality Play in a Murder Simulator

But AOE isn’t the only place where arbitrary flagging rears its head. Necromancers, for example, must enable criminal acts by default—not because of any player-driven act of aggression, but because of a shallow, single-player-RPG morality trope.

It’s an artificial restriction that ignores the open-world nature of MO2. Why should one type of magic be inherently criminal when it has no effect on other players unless actively used against them?

The real problem isn’t necromancy itself—it’s that undead minions create a visual and mechanical nuisance in towns. And the simplest fix?

🛠 Guards kill undead on sight, but not the necromancer.

This neatly solves the issue without forcing players into an arbitrary "evil" role just because they want to use necromantic magic.

It’s exactly the kind of design that makes logical sense while preserving player freedom. It acknowledges that not every necromancer is a cackling villain bent on world domination. Some might just be scholars, healers experimenting with the forces of life and death, or practical fighters using whatever tools are at their disposal.

But Let’s Be Honest: "Necromancy is Evil" is the Dumbest Excuse in MO2

The notion that necromancy must be criminal because it’s “evil” is laughable when you consider the actual behavior of players in Mortal Online 2.
A bunch of necromancers experimenting with dark arts in a swamp somewhere is nothing compared to the parade of "righteous" blue-tagged griefers roaming the land, slaughtering noobs for sport while spouting nonsense about how “PvP is content.”, "This is what the game's about, learn to fight!" etc.

MO2 isn’t a carefully curated high-fantasy morality play. It’s a lawless medieval madhouse where:
✅ So-called noble knights behave like warlords.
✅ "Good guys" rob people in the open.
✅ Self-proclaimed protectors of justice siege entire guilds into oblivion over a slight.

But no, it’s necromancy that must be the hard moral line, because summoning a skeleton is obviously a greater crime than ganking an innocent crafter for their pickaxe.
Truly, we must draw the line somewhere, and that line is apparently undead minions—not actual player behavior.

If we’re being realistic, the “EVIL NECROMANCER” trope makes sense in single-player RPGs where the world reacts accordingly—but in MO2, the world is a PvP free-for-all where morality is entirely dictated by player behavior.

By that logic, if necromancers must be criminal for simply existing, then:
⚖️ Every “noble” guild leader issuing a siege order should be red.
⚖️ Every thief who steals gear should be branded a permanent criminal.
⚖️ Every tamer walking their zoo into town should be fined for public disturbance.

But no, only the guy raising a skeleton in the woods gets slapped with the criminal tag.
What nonsense.
At the end of the day, it’s not about morality—it’s about mechanics.
Make necromancy a tool, not a crime. If people use it for criminal acts, let that be player-driven.
And if players really want to LARP as the Scourge of Myrland, let them choose that path—don’t force it on them just for picking the skill.
 
Jan 5, 2025
63
14
8

Why is the System This Way? Design by Appeasement

But why did SV design the system this way?
Simple: it’s a textbook example of design by appeasement—where a problem is met not with a well-thought-out systemic fix, but with a quick patch to pacify the loudest complainers or some immediate and isolated but pressing concern.

And as always, the consequence is more problems, not fewer.

🚨 Red towns were ghost towns?
👉 Let reds into blue towns!

🚨 Now blues are attacking reds and guards are intervening?
👉 Make local grey a thing!

🚨 Now reds can gank in town with impunity by baiting blues?
👉 Uh... let's just ignore that.

And here we are. A "justice" system that punishes lawful players more than criminals—all because every fix has been a reaction, rather than a coherent vision.

This is exactly what happens when a game lacks a clear and consistent philosophy behind its mechanics.

Another Core Problem: Local Grey is a Flawed Mechanic

This is a misguided attempt at "balance" that completely ignores how exploitable the system actually is.

The only reason a criminal (grey) ever needs to "defend himself" is because he attacked blue players or their property in the first place.

If a blue attacks a criminal, the criminal can already fight back—because he chose to become a criminal by enabling criminal actions.

He can’t really become “more” criminal by fighting back against an attacking blue. The only consequence is that he might get an extra MC if he wins—which, as we’ll cover below, isn’t the game-breaking catastrophe, nor the inevitable outcome some claim it to be.

The moment a lawful player, or even a healer supporting them, turns grey to the criminal, the criminal is suddenly granted an artificial advantage, allowing them to engage and kill the involved blues without triggering guard intervention.

Worse still, because guards don’t intervene, criminals can bait lawful players into a trap—even inside towns.

This isn’t just bad design—it’s griefing encouragement at the mechanical level.

Exploiting This System: The Goon Gang Special

  1. Step One: A blue accomplice (or an alt) attacks a red or grey in the criminal gang out of sight.
  2. Step Two: The red/grey gang beats them down but doesn’t finish them off.
  3. Step Three: The blue accomplice flees into town or toward a blue healer—begging for aid.
  4. Step Four: A lawful blue healer (acting in good faith) casts a single heal spell.
  5. Step Five: That healer is now flagged local grey to the criminals, allowing the reds/greys to murder the healer in town, right in front of guards, without consequence. "Learn the game!" right?

Why This is a Bad Mechanic

This mechanic is so easily abused that it actively punishes cooperation, while making criminal behavior easier and more lucrative.
  • It punishes cooperation and good-faith interactions. In a game that already has severe social problems due to its toxic player base, why on earth would you discourage healing?
  • It makes criminality even easier by turning lawful players into free targets.
  • It allows criminals to completely bypass the guard system through nothing more than a staged attack and a single cast of healing magic.
  • It encourages a perma-cycle of griefing, since lawful players will stop healing entirely once they realize it gets them killed.
  • It completely undermines any sense of immersion or logic—why do guards stand idly by while criminals abuse a healing exploit in broad daylight?

The Proper Fix

1️⃣ Remove Local Grey as a Mechanic Entirely

If a blue attacks a grey, the grey can already fight back. The fact that he willingly attacks and fights blues is why he's grey in the first place!
The game doesn’t need a system where players become “temporary criminals” to specific people—this only exists as an excuse to shield criminals from real consequences.

2️⃣ Healing Should Never Turn You Grey, Unless Healing a Criminal

  • A blue healing another blue should never result in criminal status.
  • A blue healer should only turn grey if healing a grey/red, as that is abetting a criminal.
 
Jan 5, 2025
63
14
8

The Murder Count Mirage: A Fake Concern for "Fairness"

"But he'll get an extra MC if the blue dies! That's so unfair!"

Unfair to whom exactly? To the guy who already attacked blue players and is now simply facing the natural consequences of being a criminal?

If a blue initiates the fight against a criminal, the criminal is already free to defend himself—after all, he's already marked as someone who attacks blues in the first place. The only thing at stake here is that if the criminal wins and kills the blue, he gets an extra MC.

And what exactly is the problem with that? If you’re a criminal, you’ve already chosen a playstyle that revolves around attacking blue players—so gaining more MCs isn’t some unfair burden, it’s part of the bragging rights of playing as an outlaw. If anything, racking up MCs should be a badge of honor for those who claim to embrace the life of a lawless marauder. Or is the real issue that they want the thrill of being an outlaw without the inconvenience of actually being one?

And if a red or grey genuinely doesn’t want the extra MC, there’s already a solution built into the game: just leave the attacker in submission state. That’s literally why submission exists—to give players the choice of restraint. If griefers actually cared about avoiding MCs, they’d use it.

Apropos MCs: The Fledgling System, A Protection That Only Works in Theory

On paper, the fledgling system is designed to protect new players from being senselessly ganked. In reality, it does the opposite. The reason? It assumes that murder counts (MCs) are a deterrent, when they’re not.

The fledgling system only makes sense in a game where MCs actually matter. Right now, MCs don’t function as a deterrent, so fledgling protection is meaningless in practice—if anything, it just serves as a flashing neon sign that says, "I’m an easy target!"

The devs designed the fledgling system as if MO2 had a working justice system, but it doesn’t. So the protection is theoretical rather than functional—it assumes a world where players want to avoid MCs, when in reality, criminals are indifferent to them.

The result? Some new players voluntarily remove their fledgling status because they realize it makes them more of a target, not less. If griefers actually cared about MCs, fledglings would be safer than regular blues. Instead, they get ganked just as often—if not more—proving that the entire system is built on an illusion of protection rather than actual enforcement.

Why the Old Red-Town Situation Wasn’t a Real Test

1️⃣ Most "reds" weren’t actually red.
  • The vast majority of PKs weren’t true outlaws—they were griefers abusing the blue-on-the-outside, red-on-the-inside exploit.
  • Since shedding murder counts is trivial, the number of actual permanent reds is tiny.
  • If most PKs never stay red, it’s no surprise that red towns are empty—they’ve never been forced to use them.
2️⃣ If the system actually kept criminals red, red towns wouldn’t be empty.
  • A properly enforced justice system would ensure a constant outlaw population in red towns, smaller than blue towns, but stable.
  • The problem isn’t that red towns can’t work—it’s that they were never given a chance to.

3️⃣ Red towns never had enough activity to become self-sustaining.
  • An economy needs both buyers and sellers. Since criminals were never forced to rely on red towns, they never gathered in sufficient numbers to establish a viable marketplace.
  • This created a self-fulfilling prophecy:
    “Red towns are empty, so I won’t use them.”
    “No one is using red towns, so they stay empty.”

What’s Different in the Proposed System?​

  • All PKs stay red until they atone or are purged from the game. No more blue-on-the-outside nonsense.
  • Reds cannot enter blue towns. No exceptions.
  • Red towns become the only hub for outlaws. Instead of being an option, they become a necessity.
  • This creates a true outlaw economy. The moment all PKs are actually treated as criminals, they will have to use red towns—finally giving those locations a reason to exist.

The Real Ratio of Reds vs. Blues:​

  • For every actual red that attacks gratuitously, at least ten blues (exploit-abusing griefers) do the same thing.
  • This means that the real number of PKs is easily 10x higher than the visible red count.
  • If even half of those griefers were forced to stay red under a functioning justice system, red towns wouldn’t just be populated—they’d thrive.
In short:
The old system never properly tested the idea of a living red-town economy, because it never truly made players stay red. If reds are actually forced to be outlaws, they’ll naturally create their own ecosystem—something the game sorely needs.

Why Fixing This Matters

This isn’t just about "punishing griefers." This is about making the game better for everyone.
✅ Lawful players get actual security.
✅ Reds get an actual identity, instead of being blue-on-the-outside, red-on-the-inside.
✅ Red towns finally become real outlaw hubs.
✅ The game stops feeling like a lawless gankbox disguised as a sandbox.

And yet, when the exploit crowd screams about “fairness,” what they really mean is:

"We want the thrill of being outlaws without the inconvenience of actually being outlaws."

Tough luck.
It's time to fix the system.
 

Teknique

Well-known member
Jun 15, 2020
1,845
1,394
113
Despite the fact that you are an accursed fool devoid of any substance or character I must unfortunately engage with you in order to further my goals of revitalizing the forums.

I want to particularly talk about the local grey system. One thing that I found particularly odd is that local grey allows looting. This differs from the first game and as far as I am concerned is a bug. This alone mitigated the consequences of attempting to kill a red. Because at least you could just get your loot back and try again.

The other thing is that pocket healing a red should be a criminal action. I understand why it isn’t based on the rules in mo2 but the guards should see this as interference and put a similar war target debuff. There is nothing particularly interesting in a red walking in with a good squad of pocket healers.

Go in suffering

-tek
 
Jan 5, 2025
63
14
8
Indeed, local grey, the masterstroke of game design. Imagine sitting in a room, brainstorming how to make a justice system even more convoluted and counterintuitive, and then—Eureka! Someone jumps up and shouts: "What if we add an arbitrary, situational criminal status that’s different for every player depending on past interactions, but still makes absolutely no sense to anyone involved?" And thus, local grey was born. A system so elegantly broken that even the guards would rather just look the other way. Or, to put it more succinctly "local grey" is retarded af!
 
Jan 5, 2025
63
14
8
Indeed, local grey, the masterstroke of game design. Imagine sitting in a room, brainstorming how to make a justice system even more convoluted and counterintuitive, and then—Eureka! Someone jumps up and shouts: "What if we add an arbitrary, situational criminal status that’s different for every player depending on past interactions, but still makes absolutely no sense to anyone involved?" And thus, local grey was born. A system so elegantly broken that even the guards would rather just look the other way. Or, to put it more succinctly "local grey" is retarded af!
For a vivid illustration of how local grey in it's current state "contributes" to the game at the immersion/RP level, see my short story "The Butchers of Tindrem, Jewel of the Empire", in the general forum.
 
Last edited: