Attacking for the Sole Reason that Someone is Offline is Dishonorable Play

[Raveleet]

Morals vary from person to person...and you just have to deal deal with it Sanskrit...you cannot force your own beliefs and morals onto everyone else, no matter how good they might be..

If I as a euro player one morning decide to gather some people and attack a to help a clan guild build a new base.
Find two bases open to attack one belonging to a guild with mainly US players and one belong to a euro based guild.
I would choose to attacl the US tower simply because the probability of victory would be bigger, as the defenders most likely would be sleeping.

and as Kuro said...for your ideals to work, you will need 100% of the players to be honest and with the same moral standards as you.
I can't imagine that ever happening.
We are playing a game and the hardest punishment you can get is a cancelled account and maybe a comment or two thrown at you from a upset toon, not much to force people to behave there.

[Canto]

Originally posted by Kiryat-Dharin
Actually, in AO cheating is expressly prohibited.

But we're still left with the point of this: WHAT DOES IT MATTER IF YOU CAN CHEAT IN MONOPOLY, WHEN WE'VE MORE THAN ESTABLISHED THAT ATTACKING WHILE YOUR OPPONENT IS OFFLINE IS NOT CHEATING?

You must know by now that "attacking when an opponent is offline is cheating" is not my position. Why do you persist in this gross distortion?

Originally posted by Kiryat-Dharin

Sanskrit, ad hominem attacks get you nowhere. So stop calling Kuro a troll. If anyone's trolling, it'd have to be you.

LOL, like yours or Kuroshio's feelings are hurt (or mine for that matter). So I should endure constant flaming in this thread but not dish any out? Kuroshio and you have ignored and distorted my position in this thread continually, whereas I have made a good faith effort to post a reasonable response to most of the points you guys have made. I think my Turing flames are funny but sorry if I hurt yours or Kuroshio's feelings... Hell, no one else but us is reading the thread at this point.

[Kuro]

Originally posted by Sanskrit

You must know by now that "attacking when an opponent is offline is cheating" is not my position. Why do you persist in this gross distortion?

Hrm...Perhaps you are to blame? When you say things like:

Originally posted by Sanskrit
believe that to attack towers for the primary reason that you know the tower owners are offline and not likely to come online soon is at best dishonorable play, and at worst, cheating.

Originally posted by Sanskrit
A straw man is when I say

"Attacking for the very reason that the opponent is not online playing the game is dishonorable/cheating/wrong." and you reply

Originally posted by Sanskrit
THERE IS NO "RULE" ANYWHERE AGAINST SUCH AN ACTION, YET IT IS ABSOLUTELY WRONG, CHEATING AND DISHONORABLE because I stepped outside the boundaries of the game to the direct detriment of my opponents in the game.

Originally posted by Sanskrit
This is cheating in the same respect that any other dishonorable action not covered in the rule book of any game is cheating.

There were more such little gems left all over. But I got tired

Originally posted by Sanskrit
LOL, like yours or Kuroshio's feelings are hurt (or mine for that matter). So I should endure constant flaming in this thread but not dish any out? Kuroshio and you have ignored and distorted my position in this thread continually, whereas I have made a good faith effort to post a reasonable response to most of the points you guys have made. I think my Turing flames are funny but sorry if I hurt yours or Kuroshio's feelings... Hell, no one else but us is reading the thread at this point.

You've made no effort, let alone one in good faith. You broke out the matches and gasoline the minute anyone disagreed with you, ignoring any points they might have made while attempting to play the wounded party. Nobody has distorted your position. You're position is that attacking when a player is ofline is Dishonorable. Dishonorable, to you, equals Cheating. The problem you're really having is none of us are really atrox enforcers with big enough sledgehammers to get the point through to you:

Dishonorable or not, it is NOT cheating. And many people do not care about your concept of Honor neither.

[Jynne]

It must be a really boring afternoon for some people

Me included, seeing as I actually clicked this thread.

[Kuro]

Originally posted by Jynne
It must be a really boring afternoon for some people

Me included, seeing as I actually clicked this thread.

Pfft...This is about as exciting as watching grass grow...in Antartica. There's no debate here.

Offline attacks dishonorable? I think it's been established that yeah, it's not staring your opponent in the teeth like a man/woman/atrox. My concern is that Sanskrit is pushing beyond that. He's pushing for change which, IMO, will only lead to a change in game mechanics that really screws up tower PvP. It's almost inevitable. The proof is in AO's own history, some of which I named like the Full Auto change.

[Canto]

Originally posted by Kuroshio

You've made no effort, let alone one in good faith. You broke out the matches and gasoline the minute anyone disagreed with you, ignoring any points they might have made while attempting to play the wounded party.

Drop it Kuroshio, you (and Dharin) are the king of the trolls not me. Your posts all ring with snide comments which I won't bother to quote here and I never called you a cheater. What I did say was that if you do these things you could be labelled a cheater under some definitions of cheating. I have no idea what you actually do in the game nor do I care.

Originally posted by Kuroshio

Nobody has distorted your position. You're position is that attacking when a player is ofline is Dishonorable.

You are obviously trolling here because you know full well this is not my position.

I don't mind though because all the bumping has caused the thread to be seen by many players. Thanks again.

[Kuro]

Originally posted by Sanskrit

Originally posted by Kuroshio
Nobody has distorted your position. You're position is that attacking when a player is ofline is Dishonorable.

You are obviously trolling here because you know full well this is not my position.

I don't mind though because all the bumping has caused the thread to be seen by many players. Thanks again.

Tu hablas espanol?!? I've gotta ask because someone isn't speaking english here.

I know full well that isn't your position? Erm, correct me if I'm wrong but you started this thread and the thread's title is:

Attacking for the Sole Reason that Someone is Offline is Dishonorable Play

Explain

[_______Revolutionary]

First off...I'd like to say that I'm kicking myself for not getting to this one sooner...


Sanskrit, you may have a point. I said may have a point. When you say that to attack knowingly when the oposition is offline is dishonorable, you are correct. It is dishonorable, however, honor does not win wars. And yes this is a video game that represents a war. So I guess that makes it a "wargame" and the amazing thing about wargames is that they mirror real wars fairly closely. The point is, in war or wargames, you do what ever is within your own moral standards to win.

I'll be the first to admit that if I were planning raids for my guild, I'd be looking for the weakest targets, i.e. guilds whose members reside in timezones that are "sleeping" while my guys are out in full force. But, thankfully for the reputation of LC, more diplomatic heads than mine make those decisions.

Does it make me a bad person because I play dirty, cheap and devious to win? Not really, because I'm still playing within the rules of the game (what little there are). Am I morally corrupt or other such nonsense? Maybe, but that would be a matter of opinion. All I know is, I don't lose sleep over what I do in a game, and neither should anyone else. If you take an attack personal and see it as cheap or dishonorable, then you need to quit playing all MMORPGs right now and go back to PS2 or XBox so you don't have to deal with other people who are exercising their rights to play this GAME as they want to. They are paying the same ammount you are and have a right to play it they way they want to within the rules. And they also have the right to not be judged for their actions, that job is reserved for someone mightier than yourself.

[locomdenom]

Tonight I watched a base get destroyed because none of the guild showed up. The few who did show were just friendly omnis, and we didn't have a chance.

Did I call the attackers cheaters? Did I petition them? Did I even say anything other than "Oh well, shoulda done a better job protecting their tower?"

No. I shrugged and went on with my life, because that's the way it goes.

I get the impression you'd have started a thread about it, Sanskrit.

And no one is distorting your position - you do that just fine on your own.

Ah well, at least this thread gives me something to do while I wait for applications to finish installing. Damn hard drive failures.

[Canto]

Kuroshio, my position is clear and easily deciphered from the title of the thread.

1) Attack me when I'm offline... fine, no problem, I'll do the same to you. I joined in a raid on New Year's Eve! Attack on Christmas, Kwanzaa, 4AM in the morning, 2PM in the afternoon, whenever... fine, no problem whatsoever.

2) Calculate by means of org rosters, tells, assumptions about my time zone, holidays whatever that I am not online, and then give primary strategic importance to that fact in planning an attack... this is where I have a problem.

3) What do I want done about it? I only want individuals to consider their actions. I don't want to estimate anyone's intent. As I have said over and over and over and over and over, am not trying to advocate some courtroom or trial procedure.

4) What I am asking is that people who agree that calculating when your opponent will not be playing the game for the purpose of attacking is wrong not participate in raids based on such tactics, and that if they are in positions of power in their orgs, that they not make it org policy to use such tactics.

Do you now see that "Attacking when the opponent is offline is wrong" is NOT my position?

[Canto]

Originally posted by Revolutionary
people who are exercising their rights to play this GAME as they want to. They are paying the same ammount you are and have a right to play it they way they want to within the rules. And they also have the right to not be judged for their actions, that job is reserved for someone mightier than yourself.

You have the right to play however you want, no one is disputing that. I have the right to believe that attacking an opponent for the sole reason that they ARE NOT PLAYING THE GAME is poor sportsmanship, dishonorable and maybe even cheating, and if NW degenerates away from being a game where people set out to fight each other and becomes instead dominated by socially and morally retarded children looking for any angle to "win" by avoiding playing THE GAME, rest assured I will be gone. Play however you want, and if you play within the rules but dishonorably just admit it and be on your way. Did you want me to suddenly change my mind and say, "Awww it's ok, you're not a bad person..." LOL.

IT IS A WARGAME, NOT A WAR.

So far NW is looking pretty good. Although the children are at it looking for any and every way to circumvent the mechanics of the game. For instance, attacking a tower with a pet apparently doesn't send a proper attack notification. Also, though aiding lower levels has been prohibited, high level engineers can still warp teams of lower levels straight to the battle. Is this within the letter of the rules? Yes, because FC hasn't coded to stop it yet. Is it poor sportsmanship and dishonorable? YES!

Scheduling attacks for least resistance is one thing, scheduling attacks purposefully so that your opponent is not playing the game is another.

[Canto]

Originally posted by Kiryat-Dharin


And no one is distorting your position - you do that just fine on your own.

My position is quite clear to those who read and think before typing. You are so desperate to cling to your straw man that you use an ingame example of your distortion to attack my position. Pathetic.

Oh and thanks for the implied ad hominems, "Sanskrit runs straight to the boards to whine about everything, Sanskrit makes whiny petitions all the time." LOL, it would be nice for you to get me into that mold. FYI, I have sent two petitions in 315 levels of play and both concerned bugs. Also, you can easily tell that though my postcount is high I don't start many threads.

Maybe you are still peeved cause I made the GA/NT nuke whiners look like fools, is that it?

[_______Revolutionary]

Originally posted by Sanskrit


You have the right to play however you want, no one is disputing that. I have the right to believe that attacking an opponent for the sole reason that they ARE NOT PLAYING THE GAME is poor sportsmanship, dishonorable and maybe even cheating, and if NW degenerates away from being a game where people set out to fight each other and becomes instead dominated by socially and morally retarded children looking for any angle to "win" by avoiding playing THE GAME, rest assured I will be gone. Play however you want, and if you play within the rules but dishonorably just admit it and be on your way. Did you want me to suddenly change my mind and say, "Awww it's ok, you're not a bad person..." LOL.

IT IS A WARGAME, NOT A WAR.

So far NW is looking pretty good. Although the children are at it looking for any and every way to circumvent the mechanics of the game. For instance, attacking a tower with a pet apparently doesn't send a proper attack notification. Also, though aiding lower levels has been prohibited, high level engineers can still warp teams of lower levels straight to the battle. Is this within the letter of the rules? Yes, because FC hasn't coded to stop it yet. Is it poor sportsmanship and dishonorable? YES!

Scheduling attacks for least resistance is one thing, scheduling attacks purposefully so that your opponent is not playing the game is another.

1) Its been established that this while poor sportsmanship, is not cheating (at this time, and should never be). I think its time you quit trying to get this labled as cheating. And lets be clear, that is your motive for calling this out in a public forum, to rally support to your cause and draw attention to that support base.


2) "Socially and morally retarded children"? - You sir, who would use such a statement, have NO honor nor any idea of what honor is. That is one of the most offensive statements I've ever read. You deserve whatever judgement befalls upon you pathetic excuse of a soul.

3) I admitted that it is my preference to play using dishonorable tatics, I make no bones about it. I'm not asking for your approval or for you to say "I'm not a bad person"? Hell no I'm not, I don't want or need the approval of somone like yourself who is so single mindedly set on imposing his beliefs upon the masses. Morality has no place in this game if the players don't want it to be there. Start a poll and see how many agree with you versus the number that just don't give a **** about morals.

4) Ok, so this is a wargame, not war. How many times have you said that now? I honestly don't think you comprehend what wargame means, it means:

"a simulation of conflict by two or more opposing sides where engagements are acted out with either soldiers or representations of soldiers being moved/commanded with the goal bringing a victory to one of the participants..."

Get that? A simulation...that means that when particpating in a war game you bring all the tatics into use that you would use in an actual engagement. You say, "Scheduling attacks for least resistance is one thing, scheduling attacks purposefully so that your opponent is not playing the game is another." How is that so? If I'm trying to schedule an attack for when you are least capable of defending, wouldn't that be when the majority of you guild is offline? In this game offline=sleep. In RL during a state of war attacking during the night or "sleep time" is a widely used tactic is it not? Translate that using the definition of wargame and you have attacking knowing that your opponent is offline equals sneak, dirty, and dishonorable but a fact that you just have to deal with. Two words: PLAN BETTER! Make your guild stronger by recruiting players from around the world and recruiting players that are willing to put the time and effort into protecting the investment that you as a guild have made. Its that simple, somebody already suggested it, you must really be thickheaded...

5) Please stop trying to pretend that you are not just whinning because you go outplayed. And when I say outplayed I mean that there was someone out there that wanted to take your base down more than you wanted to keep it, and they went outside the rules of "fairness" that exist in the minds of would be saints.

I mean take a look at the filth that you are spewing in this thread. You have pretend to have honor, but insult anyone who disagrees with you as well as anyone who doesn't play the way you would like for them to. You have continously attempted to take the moral highroad when there is none in this situation. We are playing war just the same as if we were all five years old with plastic ray guns running around the schoolyard, nothing more. Let it be, its a game, its a game about war, but that doesn't mean that morality, fairness, honor have a place. For that matter, morality, fairness, honor don't really have a place in RL wars either.

I mean come on, shouldn't we all be playing instead of typing?

[Kuro]

Well said, Revolutionary.

Fact of the matter is people like Sanskrit really wouldn't want to play me in a true wargame. They'd be appalled by my tactics.

I play Midieval: Total War. I will purposely target an opponent's peasants, the weakest units and those with the least morale, with archers, catapults and any other unit that provokes fear. Cause when their morale breaks and they run, they'll usually break the morale of anyone around them. When they break and run, I'll send calvary unit at their backs to run them down and increase the kill ratio. Sanskrit will love this: Calvary units of royal knights will refuse to chase down any fleeing enemy that they don't consider 'elite'. So I use normal calvary instead If I'm the defender, I'll stay on high ground and not budge from that spot. Because there is a time limit to engagements and the defender wins by default if not routed. Even if I have the superior force.

I'm the sniper in tactical shooters like Ghost Recon or Rogue Spear. I'm not going to go hunting for you and risk getting capped. I'll wait for you to pop your head up so I can take it off at my convenience (many people consider the snipers in tactical shooters to be the cheapest people on the planet).

When playing any game versus a live opponent, my role is to strike at your biggest vulnerability from the most advantageous position possible for me. Is it honorable? No. Do I care? No. Nowhere on the Notum Wars box is it said that every tower battle will be a guaranteed contest between equals. My role is to ensure that doesn't happen. Though luckily for Sanskrit and his ilk, I won't bother jumping through all the different hoops involved with tracking an org's online/offline status. It's too easy too simply initiate a strike, pull back, and see if anyone responds. If yes, move one. If not, finish the job

Hmm...now I'm bloodthirsty. I'll go crank up M:TW, slaughter a few thousand peasants, pillage people's cities and raze them the next turn

[Blackwing]

but realize that the more "efficient" you get...


the less people will play with you.

that is what it is all about, what he is saying.

i do not know what a poll would bring but the fact that pvp brings out the worst in people will now and forever mean that the majority of players will utterly ignore it.

games are meant to be played to be fun for all participants and not for some.

[_______Farah Oersted]

If NW is a wargame, as some would put it, then wouldn't ninja striking be considered asymmetrical warfare and therefore fair play? Granted, it isn't nice, but then war isn't nice either...

[_______Revolutionary]

Originally posted by Suntoucher
If NW is a wargame, as some would put it, then wouldn't ninja striking be considered asymmetrical warfare and therefore fair play? Granted, it isn't nice, but then war isn't nice either...

You're right, but the young ones can't handle that fact of life....

[locomdenom]

Lemme give you another example, Sanskrit, that I'm SURE you'll consider a 'distortion'.

In Unreal Tournament, on certain CTF maps, a good sniper could literally keep the entire other team dead.

I was a damn good UT sniper.

So, did it suck for the other team if I head-shotted all the ones who spawned out of view and spawn-camped the rest of them? Yep.

But my team won.

Lots of people called me a cheater, assumed I used an aimbot (never!), etc, etc.

Was I cheating? Or just using my skills and tactics to the best of my abilities?

You can't win this. The problem, you see, is that we agree with you: attacking because your opponent is off-line IS dishonorable. We all agree with that.

We just don't think there's anything wrong with it.

You gonna change my ethics? I think no.

edit: Oh, and in another thread, where I argued that something that the game allowed was in fact exploiting, you said "Well, that's the way the game works." But FC has said that it shouldn't work that way. That's why it's exploiting. If FC were to say that attacking while your opponent was offline was exploiting, I'd stop. Actually, if they said that, I'd stop playing, because that'd just be stupid. But you do see the point here?

[Canto]

Originally posted by Revolutionary

And lets be clear, that is your motive for calling this out in a public forum, to rally support to your cause and draw attention to that support base.

No my purpose here is to ask people to think about how they play.

Originally posted by Revolutionary

2) "Socially and morally retarded children"? That is one of the most offensive statements I've ever read.

Maybe you need to read a little more.

Originally posted by Revolutionary

Start a poll and see how many agree with you versus the number that just don't give a **** about morals.

I could care less about polls.

Originally posted by Revolutionary

4)
that means that when particpating in a war game you bring all the tatics into use that you would use in an actual engagement.

please don't blow up my computer...

Originally posted by Revolutionary

PLAN BETTER! Make your guild stronger by recruiting players from around the world and recruiting players that are willing to put the time and effort into protecting the investment that you as a guild have made. Its that simple, somebody already suggested it, you must really be thickheaded...

hmmm, you are making this game sound more and more like work and less and less like fun. Yes, I am quite thickheaded.

Originally posted by Revolutionary

I mean take a look at the filth that you are spewing in this thread. You have pretend to have honor, but insult anyone who disagrees with you as well as anyone who doesn't play the way you would like for them to.

Yes, have "spewed" lots of "filth" here. I am feeling more and more "filthy" each day because of it too. Yes, I do tend to insult people who post inanities or who insult me first.

[Kuro]

Originally posted by Sanskrit

Yes, have "spewed" lots of "filth" here. I am feeling more and more "filthy" each day because of it too. Yes, I do tend to insult people who post inanities or who insult me first.

Hmm...The first thing you posted in reply to something I posted (and wasn't even replying to you) was:

Originally posted by Sanskrit
Now go back to your sophomore (high school, not even the most naive college student would quote Sun Tzu in such a superficial manner and in disregard of context) "World Cultures" class and finish your book report.

So basically what you're saying is not only do you get to decide what is/isn't honorable, whether or not its cheating...but also whether or not what another person posts has any value? Hmm...I've been guilty of the last one. But not the first 2. So who's the bad boy here?