Forums-->Ideas and suggestions-->
1|2
| Author | Problem with people abusing min-AP described fights |
|---|
Facts:
-People want to fight battles with less than their maximum AP.
Reasons may be the AP-rule, which made people having to look very carefully after their money, not having the needed arts, or just the weather.
-Very often abusing players join in then with their maximum arts set
-As result people leave the fight, don't fight properly because they think they can't win, suicide themselves, or even fall in their normally mates's back (none of these actions should be fined)
-After that all fighters (besides the betrayer) feel betrayed, get upset or even post something in the forum ^^
Why is this?
The Betrayer gets much xp (he kills most and has artifact-bonus), has an easy win or just because it is fun for him to listen to the other players naming him betrayer or whatever.
Why is this possible to happen?
No restrictions can be set concerning AP when opening a game.
This can SO easily be changed but nothing has been done for ages to change this (i know this topic to be discussed VERY long ago already). It would be very easy to implement the needed changes, there are already AP-restrictions for tournaments and these can easily (in maybe only a few hours, maybe days, but not months work) be added to groupbattles aswell.
So ... why has that not happened?
According to rules is is not forbidden to join a game like: "MAX 10 AP, otherwise go to my blacklist!" with 50 AP, because descriptions are only suggestions accoring to the rules.
So maybe admins think that to be more challenging for the fighters and giving some kind of variety to the game. And maybe they even want it to be like that.
Even IF it is so, this change would just be a possibility for the gamemaker to configure his game as he wants it to be and not a fixed determination.
Until these changes will be made there will always be people like "The_First" that shit on rules and destroy other peoples games. I found more games where people complained about him and his equipped arts, so he will continue doing as he does at the moment.
WORSE: There are people with the possbility to fall in such peoples backs (e.g. Knights bowmen with volley, casting heroes with earth spikes/fireball ...) to try to make it an even game, because it is MUCH too seldom that a full art equipped betrayer himself wants to balance the game after his join. And The_First even said he will report his "mate" casting spikes on his units! And when that results then in a penalty for the "betrayer of the betrayer" :P game balance and fun go to the dogs.
So, I kindly request the here so called "betrayers" to stop their actions until the suggested game restriction changes are implemented or rules are changed to make them punishable. | As you said earlier, this has been asked Ages ago and what result of it is AP Rules.
As for the betrayer, there will always be people that doesnt understand that if they have fun with that, it truely doesnt mean that we all have fun seeing them do so. | Ok ... we just have the case: Penalty imposed for "insults" (no hard insults, only angry/harsh words due to enemies rulebreaking) in a fight as i named on #1.
The betrayer does not even have the right (in my eyes) to name others bad, but he DID! The reaction was really increadibly fast and i am really surprised about that. The named guy The_First didn't do such things the first time, he does it repeatedly and THEN he even has the impertinence to report the angry people, due to his rulebreaking! And a unjustifiable penalty is imposed aswell!
The victim gets fined?!
WOW guys, i guess you know my name due to the topic before this one here and now its done!
Bye all and have fun in your funny land with your funny jurisdiction. But without ME! | "-As result people leave the fight, don't fight properly because they think they can't win, suicide themselves, or even fall in their normally mates's back (none of these actions should be fined)"
actually all of those actions should be fined according to the rules..
"3.16. Staged combats leading one of the parties to losing a priori will be punished for. A staged combat by definition is one where any one of the parties or party members intentionally loses to the other for any reason different from having technical problems with access to the game. Instigation to losing a combat is also forbidden." | How about staged also mean
"A staged combat by definition is one where any one of the parties or party memebers intentionally wins over the other for any reason different from being lucky, or utilizing good tactics."
Without this rule, staged combats could result where the other party doesn't intentionally lose, but has minimum AP, while the rulebreaker has full arts.
Supposing this happened, the two parties played over and over again, it is NOT a staged combat by definition because the losing party did not intentionally lose. They tried their best, but the full arts was too much. :D
Have fun abusing that loophole everyone! | | https://www.lordswm.com/forum_messages.php?tid=1832843 | I'd like to add some points here.
1. We all know we are not mean't to appoint AP limits in combats, yet people try, despite explicit statements in the rules, and then are so bold to try and claim some moral high ground when other players join who have stronger artifacts.
2. I have observed players setting up group battles with a full and powerful set of artifacts, yet wanted to restrict other participants to minimal artifacts.
3. If you want to place limits on a combat you can in duels.
4. In addition to duels there are also Optional Group Combats, where if you are afraid of those who share the same level as you, you can always fight those of lower level, and you won't need to worry how many artifacts they have.
5. If you haven't slaved away in the pits to earn some gold, or if you have wasted it all losing in Roulette, why should those who show more responsibility and save for their strong/full artifact set, be punished.
6. If the rules change I may change my perceptions on this issue, however look at it this way. If we have rules to potentially restrict the amount of artifacts in some combats, why can't we prevent those of a certain faction, clan or combat style eg no spellcasting allowed, or ban certain items e.g. those that add luck; from participating in a combat.
In conclusion:
If you want your best chance of winning or being competitive, do what you need to do, instead of complaining against those that are doing what they need to do.
People who afk from a combat because they were too lazy to buy a decent artifact set are far more worthy of going into player's blacklists, than those who breach the very false rule of Minimal Artifacts in a combat.
Establishing too many restrictions on group battles will inevitably result in complaints of players who want to join a battle but can't because there are too many other players wanting to stack the deck.
Any game that devolves to appease the lowest common denominator of conscious retardation i.e a game that rewards laziness and gambling excesses for example; probably won't last very long.
And finally the rules state you cannot restrict or influence the amount of artifacts in a group combat. The rule is very clearly stated for those that bother to read the rules. Therefore the bad sportsmanship does not come from those in breach of the false restriction, but from those who have hissy fit as an excuse their poor preparation and seek to devolve the game.
I don't think my comments are unreasonable or unfair.
Cheers | ok Ravensclaw, some comments:
1. The game creator has the right to set rules (what for are descritions, when not for that purpose). Maybe you should look around in some clans and see what they want of their members: "no joining with more AP as named in description", or however they all differently have written it down. Results (thats the only way for punishment at the moment, very sad) eviction or any other type of punishment. SO many people want that and doing clan fights is then the only possibility to get ones from birth allowed rights of fair fights and no "bad sportsmanship" as you name it.
2. Thats why all people should control all members of the game they want to join! But so often people are blind and don't read or check with who they are gonna fight. So easily done, but ignored by all.
3. Why not do same for groupbattles? Where is the definition that says: "groupbattles have to be absolutely random and unfair"
4. Thats lame and unfiar too, but so many lower level people go into their traps, sad :/
5. Who says that all people not USING their set HAVE none? Fighting min arts is just another kind of differing possible fights.
6. Why not? If the gamemaker wants to have his combat like that, why not? He might only have problems in finding participants.
"People who afk from a combat because they were too lazy to buy a decent artifact set are far more worthy of going into player's blacklists, than those who breach the very false rule of Minimal Artifacts in a combat."
lol, once again: rules set up by gamecreator, rules broken by joining of a player not reading (or whatever he names as excuse), fined is the player that obeyed the rules, and not the real betrayer. Thats absolute nonsense and has no sense of logical judgement. Victims get fined, just ... you know what it is.
"And finally the rules state you cannot restrict or influence the amount of artifacts in a group combat. The rule is very clearly stated for those that bother to read the rules. Therefore the bad sportsmanship does not come from those in breach of the false restriction, but from those who have hissy fit as an excuse their poor preparation and seek to devolve the game."
You turn it all around, the victim and the traitor.
and yes, I think your comments are unreasonable (for some parts) and unfair (for some other parts)
Facts: Traitor joins wrong battle => betrayed ones are angry => penalties outspoken for the victims due to being angry and using not even insulting words.
THAT shall be fair? forget it, never! | Geht_sterben
1. I did say If the rules change I may change my perceptions on this issue,. However changing the rules to allow AP restrictions in group combats opens a can of worms (some examples I mentioned above).
How are my comments reasonable or unjust? This is a very fair question that I would like you and you alone to answer, as you did not substantiate your claims. No groupthink or other players stepping in for Geht_sterben please.
It is not against the rules to maximise your potential in a combat, nor is it immoral. They are certainly not traitors. If anything they are wise and smart enough to save for a strong artifact set and to pick a fight with someone who has deliberately sought to handicap themselves.
If you want fixed artifact combats you can duel, or have a set clan agreement, and restrict the combat to involved clans. Alternatively you can fight people of lower level and let the lower level players have unrestricted access to artifacts.
I would like to ask the question: Why would someone start a groupbattle with only minimum artifacts? Logically the answers can only be
a. Not enough gold to buy a full set
b. As an experiment
c. To save gold for other purposes
d. To have an excuse to cry like a baby and get some attention, or self flagellate to play victim.
Regarding (d), I believe contain a tiny minority, and I suggest to them get some medical help.
Regarding (b) and (c), I can understand and appreciate that. However experiments would usually only be done a few times on each level before you get serious. Most players are always trying to save gold, even those with full artifacts to maintain.
Regarding (a), this is where I believe most players who want fixed minimal artifact group combats fit. And I say to them, who's fault is that! Stop passing the buck. Stop blaming more patient and responsible players. How about doing what it takes to play more effectively instead of smearing (i.e. calling them traitors) more intelligent players.
Now this topic is under Ideas and Suggestions, but right from the very first post this turned into a rant against players who play within the rules (where this issue is specifically mentioned in the rules), who make sacrifices to make themselves as powerful in combat as they can, and to support dishonourable players breaking the rules when they fight opponents better prepared than they e.g. by AFKing.
Again I feel my comments are reasonable and just.
Cheers | for I_own_you_all:
u don't have to quit because of it. it is not the worst injustice in this game..
anyway, you can take a break, it's summer after all :)
and u can come back when the rules are (i'd say) fairer, if not before.
i guess your pissed at the moment, but there are some things you can do about it:
1. blacklist that "betrayer" if he breaks the rules posted in description repeatedly (it works actually)
2. if you want a nice group battle with min AP, add fair players you know (and meet every day) to friends-list, and ask them to join before you create or join a challenge
etc.
i think that on level 10 i had only one "betrayer" situation, though you can't say that guy actually broke the rule in description.. he did have min AP, but with loads of enchants
sad.. level 11 player and leader of a clan :(
still, don't get upset. this game has a bad habit to waste our time this way or another, you know :D
for Ravensclaw:
you're missing the point of this game obviously
PvP TG fights are unfair in 90% cases. that should be enough imbalance already, huh?
i can't believe that you're actually enjoying when you win with full arts against min AP players | Korzika
How am I missing the point of the game? I play within the rules, I play competively and I congratulate my foes either in victory or defeat on a fight well played. I have also never deliberately AFKed. Oh, and I don't cheat.
Thief Guild fights are a different story. I am a bit more understanding with the angst of that one.
I have lost a small number of fights when fighting with full artifacts against opponents with minimal artifacts.
I have also won fights with minimal artifacts against foes with a full set (one of my proudest moments actually).
Most group combats I have fought in have had a mix of full artifacts or partials or minimal sets. I play with what hand I am dealt.
I think it is wrong to sledge players that play within the rules, and who save for a full artifact set.
For the record I cannot recall joining a group battle with a minimal artifact restriction (if I have it would not have been more than once or twice), as I avoid them (and not for the minimal AP limit either).
Players who join a group battle with less than their full potential should know what they are getting themselves into. I feel no shame losing to them, or beating them.
There is always joy in victory and sadness in defeat. After a moment it is forgotten and I don't care who had what level of artifacts. I don't think I should be made to feel guilty about who hsa what artifacts.
It is always sad when someone leaves the game. However I think if I_Own_you_all is leaving I am saddened, but I also think it is for the wrong reasons, and wrong reasons reinforced by Groupthink.
But that is just my opinion.
Cheers | I have also won fights with minimal artifacts against foes with a full set (one of my proudest moments actually).
imo, the point of this game :))
so, i was wrong when i said what i said. sorry for that.
still, i can't understand why would you defend that point of view? there are many reasons why people would want to fight with min AP, and the best fights are those that are balanced, whatever the outcome. so why spoil it for others? and there are players that spoil min AP battles all the time - cowards.
you are level 7 now. when you get to level 10 you will see that 3 min AP can't win against 2 min AP and full arts under no circumstances, unless that full art player doesn't go AFK. the difference in AP is just too great.. as it is on level 9.
but I also think it is for the wrong reasons
i agree | The second view on this topic is faction level 8 wizard with full mini-arts creating battles with minimum AP he cannot possibly lose and calling coward and cheater everyone who doesnt follow his limitation set to his advantage. That is the main reason why following the description is not obligation protected by the rules but a request.
Because we dont want any more restrictions keeping people out of the fights(no necro, elf on my side, minimum AP(especially when creator wears more)) thats why I am against changing this. I always follow the description thats why I almost stopped doing pvp. Because description is always set to fit its creator the best. | Korzika
No problem and no apology necessary, I respect your opinion.
I do want to clarify a few things.
1. If the rules on this change, my opinion may as well... but that depends on the actual rule changes.
2. You will never have an exactly fair fight unless faction level, hunt level, merc level, thief level, APs and general skill level are the same. APs are however are more controllable by the player than the other stats.
3. Fair enough, I don't know how artifacts can influence a combat at higher level.
4. The rules clearly stipulate that there are no AP limits in combats. Until that rule changes, if you are a minimal artifact user who creates a combat, you are begging for punishment
5. Posts throughout this topic vilify players who use full artifacts in combat with those who use minimal artifacts irrespective of rules stating there are no AP limits in combat. Comments in this topic also condone rule breaches on giving up unfavourable battles etc. - This form of Groupthink is what upset me the most.
Cheers | Point of having arts in this game is to have an advantage over other players. If you want limit, why not ban all arts from the game. Game is already fer and arts is the only advantage that you can bay whit gold you earned from working and hunting.
If you want really fer battle call people that you know, that will respect your wishes for the AP limit. | why make such a fuss? :)
There is a simple way to avoid the issue spoken of in the first post: Clan combat.
It only needs to create a clan (free of charge) whose member have the obligation to follow the requirement in the comment box.
Then, when you want to play in a certain way, make a clan battle instead of an open one.
Since the clan is free, it won't take long to fill it up with members, and since the only obligation and reason to be of it is to make sure everybody follow the battle creator's options, it gives no special restriction to whoever wants to join the clan.
Then, if some guys make a mess, they will just be shoot out of the clan and put in its blacklist, and no more PVP for them.
No, it is not a thing done in a second, but yes, it can be done in a little month or 2, the time to advertise things around.
Actually there are already a few clans doing something similiar, but since they are not free nor limited to this one rule, obviously they can't optimize their membership to include everybody who is just willing to play PVP with no other restriction/obligations. | Omega22:
You're level 11. The rules now are full arts, no enchant. Full arts, max enchant 40%, full arts, or some minimum or medium AP standard. Level 11s don't give you no elf, no DE, no necro, factions are pretty balanced now. Except maybe demon vs. DE, but hey, I don't put no DE in my descriptions.
And yes full triple mini-art faction level 8 wizards can lose in minimum AP. In fact, I have only lost once against one in duel- all others were close wins. | Since you don't understand what this is all about i state it here once again:
If a player opens a game without description he doesn't care whoever, with whatever equipped ... joins.
But:
If a player opens a game it is his right so set any rules he wishes. May that be "max 10 AP", "no DE" or "don't join when its raining".
The game then is open to all players (unless using clans, the game allows nothing different) and these players have the duty, in my eyes, to respect the gamecreators will. If they don't want to or can't then they have no right to join.
Since there is no possibilty to make that sure its only a matter of good manners, nothing else.
Now ... case: Rules of gamecreator broken, players that did obey rules are of course angry (and thats their right aswell! THEY were betrayed!) and therefor the words chosen are a bit harsh (absolutely understandable and normal, betrayed => angry). Then the betrayer really, really overdraws his rights and has the gutts to really REPORT the BETRAYED ONES after raising his victims hackles.
Now its absolutely obvious that the betrayer does that for fun, and not for just having easy fights (the specific one i think about is a repeat offender, and therefor [some fights have been looked at] really knows people to get angry and can never even pretend to be astonished) but for his fun and for making other peoples bad.
After this report, even a not-reconsidered penalty is outspoken (i here now accuse that specific person of subjectivity and not having an objective view or even checking anything before imposing that specific penalty).
This action is ABSOLUTELY UNACCEPTABLE, childish and it lacks any basis. Therefor my brother left after repeated ignorance of the real problem that this all is about.
Hopefully now it is made clear enough.
Sorry, if this text might have insulted anyone, but earlier and more kind tries were ignored, so this one is a bit more direct.
P.S.: This text was written by my brother and me. | SO guys, now i have to start abusing min AP fights too.
I say sorry for that now, but people don't let me other choice. | If a player opens a game it is his right so set any rules he wishes. No it is not. If the game creator of level 6 sets "no diamond upgrade", why do you see it as fair? Someone payed money, recieved efk and he cant join a fight?(for the record I didnt)
SO guys, now i have to start abusing min AP fights too.
I say sorry for that now, but people don't let me other choice.
Very, very lame excuse, others do it I HAVE to do it too. You dont have to, you want to but that is the question about your spine.
For the record: I dont approve this kind of behaviour(ignoring description), but I think there are things that the creator doesnt have right to set at fight description. |
1|2Back to topics list
|
