Jump to content

SNN-Achilles Last Stand


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Sketchy said:

So.... going into VM is cheating now?

Not sure how the two situations are comparable.

If you had actually paid attention: he didn't say going into VM was cheating.  

He made the case that one player going into VM and paralyzing 100+ others was significant grounds for him to intervene on the side of those actively still playing. 

If dude had not gone into VM things would have been totally different but he basically quit the game mid-power play on this one. 

f

  • Upvote 2

One must imagine Sisyphus happy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Sisyphus said:

If you had actually paid attention: he didn't say going into VM was cheating.  

He made the case that one player going into VM and paralyzing 100+ others was significant grounds for him to intervene on the side of those actively still playing. 

If dude had not gone into VM things would have been totally different but he basically quit the game mid-power play on this one. 

f

No shit,  I was asking him what it had to do with the topic at hand. Since the two situations aren't comparable, by his own admission.

I regret my sarcasm, I sometimes forget people aren't the best at understanding it. Perhaps they should pay more attention.

f

14 minutes ago, Cypher said:

Is that the only thing you got from Sheepy showing a bit of transparency?

The topic at hand is about Pantheons coup and the subsequent undoing of the coup. Not sure what "Sheepy showing a bit of transparency" has to do with the subject at hand or the specific debate surrounding this issue.

But I apologize, in the future I'll be sure not to say anything if Sheepy happens to delete the war system but then generously shares footage of his toilet habits for the purposes of transparency.

XLL3z4T.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Sisyphus said:

If you had actually paid attention: he didn't say going into VM was cheating.  

He made the case that one player going into VM and paralyzing 100+ others was significant grounds for him to intervene on the side of those actively still playing. 

If dude had not gone into VM things would have been totally different but he basically quit the game mid-power play on this one. 

f

 

25 minutes ago, Cypher said:

Is that the only thing you got from Sheepy showing a bit of transparency?

 

While I personally have no dog in Pantheon's issue here (I honestly don't care about it despite it being amusing it happened...  again), Sheepy opened up that box by revealing another situation that is different.

Using multis to achieve a coup/bank heist is not the same as someone going into VM, other than the crippling aspect of the actions taken.  That's why Sketchy replied with what he did.  Going into VM isn't cheating.  Using multis is cheating.

EDIT:

fricking Sketchy beating me to the reply.

Edited by Buorhann
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to agree with Sketchy on this one, he has a really good point.

Same as Buorhann, I have no dog in this fight. I am personally happy that Pantheon gets to live on, because I'd also hate to see my alliance get couped by somebody and than subsequently die. I completely understand where both Alex and Ridcully are coming from.

I wouldn't be making this post if this player had cheated or broken the game rules. I 100% support you on banning multis and reverting events that those multis caused.

However, the player that couped Pantheon was not in violation of any rules, just like you pointed out. Pantheon is fully responsible for their own alliance, they promoted that player to the heir role and having that player in the heir position was their own fault, for which they got punished. If that player goes into VM and their alliance dies, this is no one else's fault but theirs. I think in this scenario, letting this play out would've been the better choice for the game, as this was not the first time Pantheon has made this mistake, and I can bet a lot of money that it won't be the last. I can understand why players would get ticked off when Alex undo's mistakes a specific alliance makes. If they have to re-make their whole alliance because of this, than so be it, because they learned their lesson and aren't getting any special privilege. 

Having the owner of the game interfere with it when it comes to alliance coups sets a really bad precedent and it's honestly terrifying, especially because it happened through in-game mechanics with no rule violations. 

Edited by Radoje
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Radoje said:


Having the owner of the game interfere with it when it comes to alliance coups sets a really bad precedent and it's honestly terrifying, especially because it happened through in-game mechanics with no rule violations. 

you missed the point of page 2.
 

32204241a4480364cfebb04c10bf72cfaeb4dce2x696.gif
Former Manager t$ and Director of R&D
Former Director of Finance, Security in e$
Founder of The Prate Syndicate(test server)
luffyt$forum.gif
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, MonkeyDLegend said:

you missed the point of page 2.
 

You missed the point of page 3! Going into VM isn’t against the rules, crippling an alliance isn’t against the rules.

Sheepy shouldn’t have done anything. The TUE situation is different.

  • Like 1

IMG_2989.png?ex=65e9efa9&is=65d77aa9&hm=

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Going into VM is the equivalent of being inactive.

Having an inactive leader makes alliance administration nonexistent.

If you're going to play the game, then play it. Don't phase out into an untouchable dimension. You don't get to coup and then go, "Nanana poopoo, you can't touch me."

 

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Radoje said:

However, the player that couped Pantheon was not in violation of any rules, just like you pointed out. Pantheon is fully responsible for their own alliance, they promoted that player to the heir role and having that player in the heir position was their own fault, for which they got punished. If that player goes into VM and their alliance dies, this is no one else's fault but theirs. I think in this scenario, letting this play out would've been the better choice for the game, as this was not the first time Pantheon has made this mistake, and I can bet a lot of money that it won't be the last. I can understand why players would get ticked off when Alex undo's mistakes a specific alliance makes. If they have to re-make their whole alliance because of this, than so be it, because they learned their lesson and aren't getting any special privilege. 

Very strongly disagree.

If you go into VM, you're no longer playing the game for a temporary period of time. Suffering is fine if that suffering can be responded to within the gameworld, but VM cannot be responded to.

If you play the robber in cops and robbers, then you have to be able to be held accountable once you rob someone. Disappearing from the face of existence is not maintaining presence in the game where the account is held.

If you want to dodge accountability, then you have to hide within the gameworld, not beyond it.

To give a comparison, I play another game called RenaissanceKingdoms.

In that game, you can revolt against a town and loot the town treasury.

You can also send your character into retreat. People do that when they need to take a break from the game.

Anyone who goes into retreat to dodge getting arrested by the county bailiwick after revolting is punished for obviously using OOC mechanics to dodge IC accountability.

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Dubayoo said:

Going into VM is the equivalent of being inactive.

Having an inactive leader makes alliance administration nonexistent.

If you're going to play the game, then play it. Don't phase out into an untouchable dimension. You don't get to coup and then go, "Nanana poopoo, you can't touch me."

 

Sure you do. I did when I couped pantheon. Can't hit a nation that deleted and rerolled lol.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Kastor said:

You missed the point of page 3! Going into VM isn’t against the rules, crippling an alliance isn’t against the rules.

Sheepy shouldn’t have done anything. The TUE situation is different.

Completely agree with this and Radoje's post above. Nothing that was done was against the rules, so there shouldn't have been any intervention from Sheepy at all. Pantheon simply haven't learnt their lesson, this isn't the first time this has happened - with the same alliance - so it is, plainly and simply, their fault. Nothing else to it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Akuryo said:

Sure you do. I did when I couped pantheon. Can't hit a nation that deleted and rerolled lol.

The player behind a nation committing suicide is still circumventing. Admin would be more than justified to restore the bank.

The game isn't real life, but it is semi-realistic. A nation that destroyed its own rule of law would leave its inventory behind which fellow alliance members should be able to retrieve.

Admin could search bank transactions by nationid too to see where resources were sent if the bank was looted to restore them.

The bottomline is play the game for what it is, not what it's not. Don't make PnW a real life affair.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Dubayoo said:

The player behind a nation committing suicide is still circumventing. Admin would be more than justified to restore the bank.

The game isn't real life, but it is semi-realistic. A nation that destroyed its own rule of law would leave its inventory behind which fellow alliance members should be able to retrieve.

Admin could search bank transactions by nationid too to see where resources were sent if the bank was looted to restore them.

The bottomline is play the game for what it is, not what it's not. Don't make PnW a real life affair.

No he wouldn't, and Alex admitted such when it happened. Even if the bank had been deleted with the nation instead of moved.

Go back to be quiet irrelevant trash with the rest of your alliance please, the lot if you lack the capacity to discuss this.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This disagreement is about common sense.

I mean I guess you could say PnW lacks common sense.

No argument there.

7 hours ago, Akuryo said:

No he wouldn't, and Alex admitted such when it happened. Even if the bank had been deleted with the nation instead of moved.

Go back to be quiet irrelevant trash with the rest of your alliance please, the lot if you lack the capacity to discuss this.

If that's what you think Alex said, then you really didn't read between the lines.

The only trash here belongs to you for either lacking deeper understanding or not appreciating what's understood.

If you don't get it, then you're unworthy of enlightenment.

If you don't appreciate it, then you're too hopeless to bother.

Edited by Dubayoo
  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/16/2019 at 7:50 AM, Sketchy said:

The topic at hand is about Pantheons coup and the subsequent undoing of the coup. Not sure what "Sheepy showing a bit of transparency" has to do with the subject at hand or the specific debate surrounding this issue.

But why is this even a debate to begin with? As far as I'm concerned, Alex is God of Orbis and supreme ruler of the game. What he says goes and he can essentially do whatever he deems to be the right thing to do. I sincerely doubt any manner of discussion will change that fact and if people don't like the admin interfering in the game, they could always stop playing.

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 2

orwell_s_1984_oceania_s_currency_by_dungsc127_d97k1zt-fullview.jpg.9994c8f495b96849443aa0defa8730be.jpg

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Big Brother said:

But why is this even a debate to begin with? As far as I'm concerned, Alex is God of Orbis and supreme ruler of the game. What he says goes and he can essentially do whatever he deems to be the right thing to do. I sincerely doubt any manner of discussion will change that fact and if people don't like the admin interfering in the game, they could always stop playing.

But why will the admin need to interfere? I mean is the admin playing the game or what? If no rules are broken then the admin shouldn't interfere at all. Which was the case here. This has been said over and over, but what's done is done I guess.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Big Brother said:

But why is this even a debate to begin with? As far as I'm concerned, Alex is God of Orbis and supreme ruler of the game. What he says goes and he can essentially do whatever he deems to be the right thing to do. I sincerely doubt any manner of discussion will change that fact and if people don't like the admin interfering in the game, they could always stop playing.

I mean sure, he can. If he wants everyone to stop playing of course. You say "ah but there's no competition", but look at the various skilled programmers dedicated to the community and, in the mindset of an admin running a company and a game, tell me you feel no fear.

The last thing Alex needs or wants is to start alienating the entire game until the community decides to make a game themselves. We already have people as good and better at programming than Alex, and more of them. 

It's not difficult math.

Edited by Akuryo
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, MDD said:

But why will the admin need to interfere? I mean is the admin playing the game or what? If no rules are broken then the admin shouldn't interfere at all. Which was the case here. This has been said over and over, but what's done is done I guess.

 

I'm not going to try to explain the motive behind the interference here, I'm only trying to say that in the end it's Alex'  game and he can do what he wants with it. Whether or not you approve or not is a matter of personal opinion but that opinion doesn't actually change anything.

8 minutes ago, Akuryo said:

I mean sure, he can. If he wants everyone to stop playing of course. You say "ah but there's no competition", but look at the various skilled programmers dedicated to the community and, in the mindset of an admin running a company and a game, tell me you feel no fear.

The last thing Alex needs or wants is to start alienating the entire game until the community decides to make a game themselves. We already have people as good and better at programming than Alex, and more of them. 

It's bit difficult math.

I mean, I don't think you should speak for Alex as for what he needs or wants. He's perfectly capable of making his own decisions and has done so. If people decide to quit because of those decisions, potentially dooming the game, so be it. What matters is that he's the one that gets to make those decisions and we all either have to live with them or move on. If you wanna gather P&Ws programmers and get started on a new game, I'm all in favor of that. But this game belongs to Alex and if you're going to play this game you have little choice other than to accept that.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

orwell_s_1984_oceania_s_currency_by_dungsc127_d97k1zt-fullview.jpg.9994c8f495b96849443aa0defa8730be.jpg

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's pretty funny that all the people complaining about Alex interference are generally people who don't approve of VM abuse (war dodging, mainly). 

Alex made the case that VM = Inactive and then said he doesn't mind helping an alliance get an active player into leadership if the alliance owner goes inactive with no heirs in place. Which is what he did here. 

I think that's a fine standard, for the most part, and anyone trying to make the case that he is trying to equate going inactive to breaking the rules is just stretching super hard to make a case - he only brought that incident up to contextualize the precedent that, yes, he is perfectly fine getting involved with things like this when he deems it appropriate. 

We can agree or disagree on whether or not it actually was appropriate all day but at least keep your arguments straight. I think considering the fact that you can't use VM to hide a bank is a pretty good place to inform this instance but instead of hoarding resources and cash this guy was abusing VM to completely gridlock an alliance.

Strictly speaking, based on the game rules, VM has a very limited purpose. To pause your nation and make sure it is protected while the player is unable or unwillingly to actively play the game. Anything beyond that is abuse of the mechanic and can warrant Alex's intervention imo. (Sidenote: I'm of the opinion that people in VM should get warns for posting on the forums but that's just me tho.)

This dude clearly didnt coup Pantheon and then hop in the car to drive down to the beach lmao. Especially considering he was actively interviewing with basically anybody that reached out to him at the time. So he abused VM mechanics to hurt an entire alliance without offering them a fair way to retaliate within the mechanical confines of the game. 

So they prayed unto Alex and he spoke down miracles from the heavens. 

  • Upvote 5

One must imagine Sisyphus happy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And adding to that, actually, even if dude did coup Pantheon and then hop in the car to drive down to the beach, Alex has overtly made the claim that whether or not this is abuse is irrelevant, he intervened based solely on the precedent that dude was "inactive" with no heirs - and he is happy to intervene in such an instance when "active" alliance members request it of him.

I'm not sure how I feel about that but that's what we need to be bickering over - not building a straw man that Alex just came up in here and proclaimed going into VM is cheating. 

 

Even though I personally believe going into VM is cheating, unless you're actually not going to actively engage with this game in any aspect (forum posting, discord comms, bank holding, war dodging etc). 

Edited by Sisyphus

One must imagine Sisyphus happy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Sisyphus said:

And adding to that, actually, even if dude did coup Pantheon and then hop in the car to drive down to the beach, Alex has overtly made the claim that whether or not this is abuse is irrelevant, he intervened based solely on the precedent that dude was "inactive" with no heirs - and he is happy to intervene in such an instance when "active" alliance members request it of him.

I'm not sure how I feel about that but that's what we need to be bickering over - not building a straw man that Alex just came up in here and proclaimed going into VM is cheating. 

 

Even though I personally believe going into VM is cheating, unless you're actually not going to actively engage with this game in any aspect (forum posting, discord comms, bank holding, war dodging etc). 

So in your mind it's cheating to go into VM and talk on discord or the forums. 

Boy am I glad nobody takes your opinion seriously.

 

Also, suspiciously everyone in favor is syndicate or pantheon members with... What is it? Two exceptions to that rule so far? Even in discord servers it falls pretty much along those lines. You wanna talk about thinking it's funny who the opposition is, look in the mirror.

Edited by Akuryo
  • Like 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Akuryo said:

So in your mind it's cheating to go into VM and talk on discord or the forums. 

Boy am I glad nobody takes your opinion seriously.

 

Also, suspiciously everyone in favor is syndicate or pantheon members with... What is it? Two exceptions to that rule so far? Even in discord servers it falls pretty much along those lines. You wanna talk about thinking it's funny who the opposition is, look in the mirror.

Definitely not gonna deny my bias here, but you're an idiot if you think blasting off on such a general criticism of such a vague grouping of people actually does anything to challenge Alex on the merits of his moderation here.  

Y'all are being really inconsistent with your ideas about VM.

And yes, I'm a hardliner on VM, I've never used it and if I ever do you will not see me on discord or the forums. That's just me though, and I recognize Alex lets forum posts slide regularly and that's fine even though I'm irritated everytime somebody does it. Evidence of my consitency: 

 

Edited by Sisyphus
  • Upvote 1

One must imagine Sisyphus happy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In all seriousness, I don’t know why he VM’d to begin with.

Far more damaging to just demote everybody and sit “actively” as leader.  What’s the worse that could happen?  Get rolled as a low city count nation?

Demote everybody, change permissions, slap everybody into a 100/100 tax, reap the rewards.  Let the cash sit in the alliance bank.

Amateurs looking for that quick fame.

Edited by Buorhann
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.