Pretty much. Logical and self-explanatory. No evidence needed. It's been said many times over.

Simple, elegant and efficient. Really good point. 

Thats why he want private servers. Dude go to MMO forum wanting single player game... No more to say. Best just to ignore him until he gets his new ban.

You're talking exclusively from the perspective of someone being karmabombed into oblivion. However. Imagine this:

You flag up. You go and kill 3 ppl grinding in their own spots. Then, for 1 hour, you can go about butchering everything and everyone, jumping from rotation to rotation and griefing the living hell out of ppl that never ever thought to disturb anyone. You'll do that for 50 minutes. Grind 10 minutes to recoup karma and proceed to grief players for another hour after repeating the first step. Your suggestion has so much toxicity potential that it makes karmabombing will feel like a pat on the back in comparison.

The problem with gear stripping for the purpose of karmabombing sound reasonable, but because of the first topic discussed, I'm tempted to think you'd open the door for even more abuse. I mean, I'm lifeskilling, gathering plants, hunting in Narcion, fishing, you name it. You come and kill me. But I do have gear in storage, that is better than the Silver Embroidered I'm wearing. Your karma penalty will be calculated based on the gear in storage? Really? Did you think this through? At all?

Also, you want to flag 49ers for pvp? This is griefing option 1, 2 and 3. And then you come and say: "hey! if you don't like it, swap channels or patiently wait till I finish my 4h daily grind". Why? I dunno. Cus you can bully ppl on pve servers and feel good? Cus you don't want to be bullied yourself on Arsha?

I 100% agree with you that karmabombing is crap. That wardecs over 1 of these guys is unfair towards the rest of the guild. But what you're asking for is quite honestly worse. You want Arsha on every server, with a price tag of "175% of a kill" in karma, but with the difference that most non-pvp servers are populated with gearlets. 

Funny? Sad? Both?

Edit: I'm still thinking that diplomacy can beat any kind of hard-coded rule. But diplomacy is less fun than stomping down players 150+ gearscore below you. It's like whacking moles in your garden, with the added bonus of being able to toss a "git gud, scrub!" at the end. :D

You bring up some good points, and while I do not 100% understand Zeroden's full suggestions with all the ins-and-outs he's suggesting, I did come up with something.  Wondering what you think of it, lookiong for positive, constructive feedback on this proposal and potential flaws that would prevent the system from being a net positive impact for the game.  I'll present the idea and the bulletpoints associated with it, things like it's limitations to prevent abuse and workings.

Your thoughts?

I do have one, very specific, scenario I am concerned with, however, as I realize nothing in this world is ever perfect.  This system not being an exception.  Zeroden brought this up and I am trying to figure out a way to prevent this, very specific, scenario. 

Say you are grinding in a solo grind spot and multiple players, from different guilds, shows up -- they all send a Vendetta on you at the same time.  You are then forced to leave.  You can swap channels and this will effectively cancel all Vendetta's that were sent to you and each of those players who sent it will be down one out of the maximum two alotted Vendettas they have per week = this is the biggest consequence for them for using it to force you out, but is it enough?  To me, it's yes and no.  Yes, because you are given a way to end the Vendetta at your choosing and the players who sent it to you, quite literally, wasted a valuable resource.  No, because you lose the spot on that channel.  I do not forsee this happening frequently, however, no more frequently than what the more lenient GvG System allows, at least. 

The current GvG System is more lenient, but, when a player is not in a guild, they are allowed free reign to grief others.  They do assume a "safety net", however, by being guildless -- but this "safety net" can be abused.  How do we prevent this abuse?  It is 100% of the time guildless players who are allowed the maximum amount of griefing in this game, IMHO.  Guilds can at least declare war.  Guildless players cannot.  This allows them literal free reign to grief others via farming on top of other players, ruining their experience in this way, with zero repercussion, because there simply is no form of prevention of bad behavior via retribution, nor is there any penalty for doing so.  A penalty will be difficult to apply to this, so I believe retribution is the best way -- in a way that aligns with BDO's core gameplay, main content, and abiding by current rules laid out by the Operational Policy and ToS.

Sounds good, on paper. It should probably have more limitations. Either in the amount of vendettas one player can receive (so as to not be literally kicked out of every channel, no matter how bad his behavior is), or the duration. It also sounds complicated to implement at a player level and, with the recent mishaps of BDO, there's a good chance that its implementation would result in the mount riding you and the calling the horse would teleport you to your boat or something (bloody spaghetti code!).

You might get more support on this suggestion, though. As it allows for people that want level 49s to be flagged up for pvp when in a team with a foe or that want their karma loss calculated based on the opponents best gear (even if that opponent is currently afk fishing, let's say) to relentless hunt down others with no repercusion. Kinda like the diminishing returns karma loss, for 24, but only working on 1-2 people. Game systems exist to be abused :)

You do seem to have enough restrictions in place, at least in the proposed form. But it might end up with every player having 70 vendettas, 'cause "2 is too little to deal with the amount of griefers" or worse, having 2 vendettas that go on across all channels (as it's hard to make changes to that or something).

So how about you get 1 vendetta a day, no channel restriction and it expires in 180-300 minutes. Holding grudges for long is unhealthy, after all. Akin to a church buff. You could even get the blessing from the priests of Elion to hunt down your opponent... I dunno. 

All in all, I think it's a much better suggestion for handling griefing and karmabombing than what Zeroden's suggesting. You could still be a baddie and declare your vendetta against a lifeskiller, just to torment the guy (even more so, considering lifeskillers are... territorials or just restricted on where and what they can gather, making them easier to stalk).

I notice one side is really toxic. Meanwhile, I get downvoted for simply complaining that a "PVP Warrior" killed me again while I was loked in animation lifeskilling with lifeskill gear. That player then kills all the horses on the way to his grinding zone. Most companies do not want the toxic players.

Even if you disagree with someone, there is no need for toxicity. 

People will downvote simply because they don't agree with you and offer no rebuttals.  As for the person who PK'd you and horses, that player is met with negative Karma consequences.  Quite a few times, I've been grinding a solo grind spot and a guildless player farms the literal same pack of mobs I'm farming.  Can't dec.  Can't flag unless I go negative.  Can't peacefully grind.  But that player is met with literally zero consequences.

I think BDO could use an overhaul of the Karma System all across the spectrum, on many different levels.

Thanks for the feedback, it's very constructive.  IDK, it's just an idea at this point, but the devs did say they're thinking of an "operational solution" the Karma being abused, so I thought, why the heck not think of something.

A shorter duration of 180-300 minutes sounds reasonable and I can see the potential problem of having Vendettas across mulitple channels.  One Vendetta per day could work out as well, I'm just glad we both can see why it would need to be a limited resource.  What would prevent a player from having too many received Vendettas on them, however, would be swapping channel.  This cancels it.  This also serves for lifeskillers who may get a Vendetta sent, they swap channel, boom, Vendetta cancelled and the sender loses one for no good reason.  But yeah, the issue of having multiple Vendettas on multiple channels.  It would really take a consious effort, though to do this, like an entire guild would have to agree to pick on one person, and that person could just keep swapping and waste their Vendettas.  If they swap, and get hunted down on another channel, the hunters will lose Karma, rightfully so, if they try to hunt.  I can't really imagine this being too big of a problem, but you're right -- Game systems exist to be abused lol.

At the end of the day, I'm glad you're taking a constructive approach here.  Thanks for the feedback.  Hopefully the devs think of something good for the game in this department.

I'd upvote this proposal in its own thread, as having it buried down in a "Let us harass anyone, from lifeskillers to 49ers, with no consequences" thread isn't ideal.