Author Topic: New character abuse  (Read 3573 times)

Weaver

  • The Lost
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 246
  • Karma: +53/-42
    • View Profile
Re: New character abuse
« Reply #15 on: February 11, 2016, 10:26:36 PM »
I don't see a problem with this. Sure, it's crappy that new characters were used, but nothing wrong with attacking someone to deplete their funds. You made a tactical error to go into combat with so little gold if two battles will run you dry. If it was an established character, there would've been RP to find volunteers to have the 'honors' of sacrificing themselves for a greater victory. And who's to say that is not exactly what happened when those two characters appeared. I myself was on the receiving end of this, and I pushed through it, simply cause I had gold and accounted for the possibility that could happen.

Personally, I think the bigger problem the community has is what De-Legro said about trolls trying to stir the pot, and hit Realms on their supply lines without flying any banner.

Ratharing

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 505
  • Karma: +25/-12
    • View Profile
Re: New character abuse
« Reply #16 on: February 12, 2016, 12:08:35 AM »
We were talking about unaffiliated  recently-spawned disposable characters, for the purpose of using 1 soldier to suicide on  much larger army in order to drain their gold.

Disposable characters like that are of very poor taste, and extremely disturbing for the RP atmosphere. No matter how much they RP as kamikaze, their effect is terrible. It reeks of wanting to win at all costs.

That said, I'd be surprised if it was done by anyone of Hawks. I don't think it was the case.

Velrun

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 135
  • Karma: +19/-11
    • View Profile
Re: New character abuse
« Reply #17 on: February 12, 2016, 12:29:16 AM »
We were talking about unaffiliated  recently-spawned disposable characters, for the purpose of using 1 soldier to suicide on  much larger army in order to drain their gold.

Disposable characters like that are of very poor taste, and extremely disturbing for the RP atmosphere. No matter how much they RP as kamikaze, their effect is terrible. It reeks of wanting to win at all costs.

That said, I'd be surprised if it was done by anyone of Hawks. I don't think it was the case.


As is spawning new family members when you suddenly realise marching your character to war has left your estates vulnerable, or spawning nobles for the explicit purpose of ferrying troops to the front line, at which point they are killed since it is faster to spawn new ones where the troops are produced then to walk them home. Or my personal favorite and most widely seen, the newly spawned scout characters that have no purpose but to rush around enemy territory with 100 scouts. Sure they all fly a realms flag, but in the end they are all just disposable characters people create to gain an advantage. Sometimes you just have to ignore how other people play the game, and play your own game.
« Last Edit: February 12, 2016, 12:44:28 AM by Velrun »

Daimall

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 29
  • Karma: +3/-1
    • View Profile
Re: New character abuse
« Reply #18 on: February 12, 2016, 01:36:55 AM »
I did not know Mercenaries demanded gold per battle as well, Weaver. I knew they probably demanded gold per week, but there is no mention of mercenaries as far as I know in the manual so I got myself stuck in a situation where I could not really afford them since its not mentioned at all on how I pay for their services after I hired them.

I will admit that I did spawn a new family member into the war when the south got invaded, but in my defense I had been planning on introducing her for awhile and I had her created before the war even started and I do not plan for her being "disposable" I guess in a gamey sense. Invasion seem to be good reason both meta and rp wise for her to come in and is plausible. I think Tom did mention its okay to have relatives for "emergency" situation within reason, but I guess this all ends up being a code of conduct issue.

Anyways, I received a message ingame from the character in question who did this act. I am a bit leery of buying the explanation given, but I guess it does sound plausible enough that a series of coinciding events lead up to this debacle. Anyways I had already found these wars to be rather aggravating rather then fun and this incident just pushed it further into the red zone. I can see why people rather not fight wars at this point compared to say BM.
« Last Edit: February 12, 2016, 01:46:27 AM by Daimall »

Velrun

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 135
  • Karma: +19/-11
    • View Profile
Re: New character abuse
« Reply #19 on: February 12, 2016, 01:55:46 AM »
I did not know Mercenaries demanded gold per battle as well, Weaver. I knew they probably demanded gold per week, but there is no mention of mercenaries as far as I know in the manual so I got myself stuck in a situation where I could not really afford them since its not mentioned at all on how I pay for their services after I hired them.

I will admit that I did spawn a new family member into the war when the south got invaded, but in my defense I had been planning on introducing her for awhile and I had her created before the war even started and I do not plan for her being "disposable" I guess in a gamey sense. Invasion seem to be good reason both meta and rp wise for her to come in and is plausible. I think Tom did mention its okay to have relatives for "emergency" situation within reason, but I guess this all ends up being a code of conduct issue.

Anyways, I received a message ingame from the character in question who did this act. I am a bit leery of buying the explanation given, but I guess it does sound plausible enough that a series of coinciding events lead up to this debacle. Anyways I had already found these wars to be rather aggravating rather then fun and this incident just pushed it further into the red zone. I can see why people rather not fight wars at this point compared to say BM.


You don't need a defense, you simply need to understand, what is appropriate when you are fully aware of the entire decision making leading to something, is very different from what seems appropriate when all you see the effects.

Ratharing

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 505
  • Karma: +25/-12
    • View Profile
Re: New character abuse
« Reply #20 on: February 12, 2016, 03:38:42 AM »
As is spawning new family members when you suddenly realise marching your character to war has left your estates vulnerable

My beef is with disposable characters. What you have just described is not necessarily the case - though it could be.

or spawning nobles for the explicit purpose of ferrying troops to the front line, at which point they are killed since it is faster to spawn new ones where the troops are produced then to walk them home.

This is the very concept of disposable characters. Personally I despise it.

Or my personal favorite and most widely seen, the newly spawned scout characters that have no purpose but to rush around enemy territory with 100 scouts.

This can constitute a disposable character as well, which provides unfair advantage to those with lots of characters (me among them). I'm against it.

Sure they all fly a realms flag, but in the end they are all just disposable characters people create to gain an advantage.

It's about how much investment has been put into the character. Is it a lord of somewhere? Does it have gold or troops? Does it have a decent name and story (description) behind it? Does its loss mean anything?

If the answer is no to all those questions, then I'd say there's room for improvement.

Sometimes you just have to ignore how other people play the game, and play your own game.

While the game remains a lawless land, sure.

Velrun

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 135
  • Karma: +19/-11
    • View Profile
Re: New character abuse
« Reply #21 on: February 12, 2016, 03:48:55 AM »
While the game remains a lawless land, sure.


There is no such thing as universally accepted rule system. No matter what rules we put in place and enforce, there will be play styles that some within the game find repugnant, and others that find the rules overly restrictive. So in the end you still have to roll with and try to ignore those things that don't fit your personal sense of fair play. Rules are great for exceedingly obvious cases, they are much less helpful in that large all encompassing grey zone.

Weaver

  • The Lost
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 246
  • Karma: +53/-42
    • View Profile
Re: New character abuse
« Reply #22 on: February 12, 2016, 08:45:01 AM »
They do say so, on the inn, that they require gold at the beginning of every week and every battle. There is no other documentation as far as I am aware.

Though, you misunderstood my words, Daimall. I never said you did any of the random spawning. I just said that is a much more... I dunno, in my book, 'crappier' way to do things. At least when some random noble attacks you meaning to drain your funds, you have reason to believe that he belongs to the guys you are fighting.

When a random noble spawns in the middle of nowhere, gets troops, and his sole purpose is to TO all your cities while no one is in them (or suicide on the walls), you truly get to feel the meaning of the words 'terrible community'.

I personally don't mind. I am always expecting these things to happen, because the games allow them, so it doesn't really bother me. When you put things in perspective like that, war can be fun. Just my 2 cents, Daimall. Persevere. Hawks and Elysium are all good guys. No matter what anyone says, I know first-hand that they care about RP probably more than anybody, and care about winning probably less than anybody.

Tom

  • Head Developer
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6325
  • Karma: +102/-15
    • View Profile
    • Might & Fealty
Re: New character abuse
« Reply #23 on: February 12, 2016, 08:56:45 AM »

Selba Heriun got this message: "This is a sandbox and I am going to take every OOC measure I can to stir up Chaos. The dominate empires shall fall as I stir up resentment against them. Newer realms will be the resources I require to wage my war. I am everywhere, in every realm across multiple accounts. I know where you are weakest, and there I will strike."

I can't find the original message in the database, only a message that quotes it.

Tom

  • Head Developer
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6325
  • Karma: +102/-15
    • View Profile
    • Might & Fealty
Re: New character abuse
« Reply #24 on: February 12, 2016, 08:57:24 AM »
However yes, Tom should know who gave the 2 new character troops to attack my character with, I would not be too suprised if they turn out to be the same player though.

I have identified and contacted the giver of those troops as well.

Tom

  • Head Developer
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6325
  • Karma: +102/-15
    • View Profile
    • Might & Fealty
Re: New character abuse
« Reply #25 on: February 12, 2016, 08:58:10 AM »
Yes. Well ban an account. Banning a player that is tech savvy is not so easy.

But he will lose everything. It should teach him that cheating and exploits to gain an advantage will result in the opposite.

Tom

  • Head Developer
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6325
  • Karma: +102/-15
    • View Profile
    • Might & Fealty
Re: New character abuse
« Reply #26 on: February 12, 2016, 09:11:16 AM »
Frankly speaking, my motivation has dropped to zero. People playing this game have proved me that my vision was wrong and my dream just a dream.

A sandbox game does not work. Trolls and assholes will drive out the good players and then dominate it, setting the atmosphere that their behaviour is the standard.

I don't want to be the owner of such a game. But without moderating everything myself, I cannot prevent it, because if I add a complaint system, the trolls will just flood it and abuse THAT to drive out the good players as well. Doesn't matter what you do, the trolls will abuse it. And half of them don't even think they are trolls, because in their twisted reality, it's just a game and fuck other people I'm here to enjoy myself and finally behave in a way that would get me punched in the face in real life.

I think we should make that the standard. Not rules-lawyering and endless discussions if this or that is part of the "sandbox". Simply ask yourself if doing this would get you a hit in the face if you would do it in a boardgame.

Weaver

  • The Lost
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 246
  • Karma: +53/-42
    • View Profile
Re: New character abuse
« Reply #27 on: February 12, 2016, 10:03:23 AM »
That's why I keep saying to drop a god-modded character into the fray, and .. well.. simply put: Wreck them. You got the tools to know where they come from, and whose they are.

A noble who can move 30,000 yards a day, has the stats to be as effective as 500 heavy cavalry, will ruin anyone's day, realm, characters, achievements and you name it. Plus, put a 'troll'/'toxic player' in charge, and he might even leave funny reputations on the pages of everyone he obliterates.

That way, you just have to observe half a dozen who mete out the justice to those that abuse the rules, instead of the entire playerbase. And it's a poetic justice.

But to be honest, and I don't know anything about what happened here- but I don't personally think that sending two Nobles out to drain the war-funds of a character would be quite meriting of such attention.

Foxglove

  • Global Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 534
  • Karma: +72/-10
    • View Profile
Re: New character abuse
« Reply #28 on: February 12, 2016, 01:54:12 PM »
If Tom were to do that - create a character with god-like powers who went around wrecking people who caused problems - he'd have to endure lots of complaints that he was personally using those powers to give himself advantages in the game. It's been said before. Even though it's ludicrous to say that about Devs who could simply change the code anytime they want. So, frankly, there's no desirable reason for him to put himself into the firing line like that. You make a game to create fun for other people. Not to put a target on your back for trolls and griefers.

A noble who can move 30,000 yards a day, has the stats to be as effective as 500 heavy cavalry, will ruin anyone's day, realm, characters, achievements and you name it. Plus, put a 'troll'/'toxic player' in charge, and he might even leave funny reputations on the pages of everyone he obliterates.

If you think about that for a bit longer, you'll probably see that it's a bad idea. Why on earth would you give a player who's considered to be a 'troll/toxic' that sort of power? The reason they've come to be considered to be a 'troll/toxic' is because they didn't understand the bounds of responsible behaviour in the first place. They are part of the problem.

I think we should make that the standard. Not rules-lawyering and endless discussions if this or that is part of the "sandbox". Simply ask yourself if doing this would get you a hit in the face if you would do it in a boardgame.

I've been thinking this myself recently too. Maybe because I've actually been playing a lot more board games recently. In that environment, people will simply tell a fellow player to stop being an idiot or to stop making the game less fun for everyone else playing. I also don't think that these idiots are the majority of the playerbase, or that they're driving out the good players. I think they're more of a attention-grabbing minority.
« Last Edit: February 12, 2016, 01:57:29 PM by Foxglove »
Standing for the responsible use of power since Year 1, Week 1, Day 1.
Fun fact: I wrote some of the text for the M&F crowdfunding campaign.
Favourite warm beverage: hot chocolate.

De-Legro

  • M&F Dev Team
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3048
  • Karma: +105/-54
    • View Profile
Re: New character abuse
« Reply #29 on: February 12, 2016, 02:17:10 PM »
If Tom were to do that - create a character with god-like powers who went around wrecking people who caused problems - he'd have to endure lots of complaints that he was personally using those powers to give himself advantages in the game. It's been said before. Even though it's ludicrous to say that about Devs who could simply change the code anytime they want. So, frankly, there's no desirable reason for him to put himself into the firing line like that. You make a game to create fun for other people. Not to put a target on your back for trolls and griefers.

If you think about that for a bit longer, you'll probably see that it's a bad idea. Why on earth would you give a player who's considered to be a 'troll/toxic' that sort of power? The reason they've come to be considered to be a 'troll/toxic' is because they didn't understand the bounds of responsible behaviour in the first place. They are part of the problem.

I've been thinking this myself recently too. Maybe because I've actually been playing a lot more board games recently. In that environment, people will simply tell a fellow player to stop being an idiot or to stop making the game less fun for everyone else playing. I also don't think that these idiots are the majority of the playerbase, or that they're driving out the good players. I think they're more of a attention-grabbing minority.


No they are more then that, you only have to look at the responses generated in the civil war to see the damage it can lead to. When people feel cheated, feel the other side plays unfair, it encourages reciprocation. It encourages escalation. And no one is immune to that, not players, not moderators and not developers.
He who was once known as Blackfyre