Curse

Chris Blackstar · Mar 29, 2006, 12:55 AM // 00:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by General Typhus

After virtually dominating the 12v12 over the course of 3 days on the side of the Luxons(Finished up with a record of 44-3), boredom overcae me. I don't show any contempt for the Kurzicks but I thought I'd have a bit of fun with them. Me and 3 other friends actually organized a miniature Edge bomb. As soon as all (or most) of the palyer loaded in, we'd ball up, the rezmer would buff her health, and we'd sac, quick rez, sac, repaeat. We effectively scored around 60 points for the Luxons before the match even started. Needless to say something should be done about this..

It's players like this who should be banned from the game entirely, this is what I mean when I say players cheat the system, they quit or do this crap, and it ruins the fun for everyone playing, it does not matter on who's side it is.

That is why I say once a player befriends a certain side, either Luxion or Kurzick, they should be altogether be banned from partisapating in alliance battles other then for their choosen side, and if they wish to fight for the others, they should have an option to cancel their prevous alliance with the particular side they chose.

Kool Pajamas · Mar 29, 2006, 01:01 AM // 01:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by General Typhus

I'm not sure if this thread has covered sabotage as well, but I'd like to drop my 2 cents on that, although I'm rather sure it will be simply resolved in factions by not allowing a kurzik to enter the luxon side and vice versa.

After virtually dominating the 12v12 over the course of 3 days on the side of the Luxons(Finished up with a record of 44-3), boredom overcae me. I don't show any contempt for the Kurzicks but I thought I'd have a bit of fun with them. Me and 3 other friends actually organized a miniature Edge bomb. As soon as all (or most) of the palyer loaded in, we'd ball up, the rezmer would buff her health, and we'd sac, quick rez, sac, repaeat. We effectively scored around 60 points for the Luxons before the match even started. Needless to say something should be done about this.

Hmmm, was I suggesting something,...err...I think I was just bragging about being an asshole actually. GG.

True that could still happen. But if you stay in there the whole time the battle is going on, then there is still other battles happening at the same time. Your one sabotage will only affect that one battle. Its the people that leave right away and join another battle and leave that is causing the problem. If we put a time ban on the battle area for quitters then it will reduce the problem. Sabatoge can still happen but it will be much less than the current system.

General Typhus · Mar 29, 2006, 01:12 AM // 01:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Blackstar

It's players like this who should be banned from the game entirely, this is what I mean when I say players cheat the system, they quit or do this crap, and it ruins the fun for everyone playing, it does not matter on who's side it is.

That is why I say once a player befriends a certain side, either Luxion or Kurzick, they should be altogether be banned from partisapating in alliance battles other then for their choosen side, and if they wish to fight for the others, they should have an option to cancel their prevous alliance with the particular side they chose.

Excuse me for having fun. You sir, can go to hell. I hope you hit a few jagged rocks on the way down.

Chris Blackstar · Mar 29, 2006, 06:55 AM // 06:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by General Typhus

Excuse me for having fun. You sir, can go to hell. I hope you hit a few jagged rocks on the way down.

Let me tell you something, it's one thing to have fun, then fine play fair. What you did is considered Unsportsman like conduct. It is quite frustrating when you want to have fun and play fair, then a bunch of assholes like you and your friends come along and spoil what the game is about.

The only reason you won so many times was because others like you did what you did, it made the game boring for you, well if you wanted a challenge so bad, you should of faught for the Kurzicks, and shown how good a player you are, but at last you could not do that.

In my opinion, I guess you suck so much at the game and life, that you have to resort to cheating, just to make yourself feel useful for something.

General Typhus · Mar 29, 2006, 07:48 AM // 07:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Blackstar

Let me tell you something, it's one thing to have fun, then fine play fair. What you did is considered Unsportsman like conduct. It is quite frustrating when you want to have fun and play fair, then a bunch of assholes like you and your friends come along and spoil what the game is about.

The only reason you won so many times was because others like you did what you did, it made the game boring for you, well if you wanted a challenge so bad, you should of faught for the Kurzicks, and shown how good a player you are, but at last you could not do that.

In my opinion, I guess you suck so much at the game and life, that you have to resort to cheating, just to make yourself feel useful for something.

Cute. My version of fun happens to involve unsportsmanlike conduct. Damn near every prank you've been hit with in guild wars has been concocted or tried by me and friends. My record was not due to "friends" joining the Kurziks and sabotaging them. This was ONE instance, not a repeated offense. You act like I destroyed the equilibrium of the game by throwing ONE game. Since I did this, I have seen no other instances like it, aside from a couple of Kurziks joinnig on the Luxon side and screaming some moronic babble about "Suxons r teh gay!" and then disconnecting.

I prefered not to fight on the side of the Kurzik often (even though I did accumulate 10k Kurzik faction through fighting with them) because I've chosen an alliance and stuck with it. The whole "Emo" thing doesn't really float my boat. But you are a TRUE Kurzik. Emo pride.

Lol "suck at life". Grow up you little fagger.

Huntmaster · Mar 29, 2006, 08:45 AM // 08:45

I'm ashamed that you can't take into account that all Typhus and i, (and friends) were doing was helping anet see the problems with 12v12. This was a BETA after all, right? If anet doesn't realise things like this how will they fix it?

I swear to god, we were trying to help the game, not grief anyone. Besides, us Luxons were being more creative then the Kurziks who simply scream "ZOMG SUXONS ARE FAGS LOLOL." Give us a break, when you play a game where endgame consists of pretty much pvp, or farming 3 highend places, and you get a chance to try something new and fun, you jump all over it. We had our fun, deal with it.

Peewee · Mar 29, 2006, 09:16 AM // 09:16

Sabotage and leavers are a big problem. Leavers are fairly easy to punish, but intentional sabotage is harder still. Edge bombs are an obvious example, but also people playing for the opposite side, and then just simply not playing well will also make a difference. In the end though, the sabotuers dont get any faction for making a mess of the opposing team, akthough they do help their allys.

Trouble is, how do you stop these guys who deliberately mess a game up. As the 'game' sees it they are doing nothing wrong, they are just using a set of skills that happens to hurt ppl on the team. Perhaps if they disable the ability to commit suicide in battles, so ur health just dips to 1 (or negative numbers...i have done it) instead of killing you, and self inflicted conditions are removed when health is below 10% or something.

Its that or allow a voting system for other members of the team to vote a player, or grp of players off, presumeable to replaced by other players, or henchmen.

Chris Blackstar · Mar 29, 2006, 02:29 PM // 14:29

Their are many ways to prove your point about the game and it's flaws, even I could exploit many different options in the game, just like you did, but I don't.

What you all fail to realize is that others follow your example, it's not fun when 16 out of the 20 games you partisatpate in have half the team quitting due to being rage quitters, or have player sabotage the game for fun, or what ever their reasoning is, and others suffer and either quit or just get pissed off. For some it might be their first time, and now they are turned off, and for others, they wish to give it a second shot, and can see it has not changed, so they never come back to it.

It is easy to say I only did it once, maybe you did, but it effects to the gaming community at large, and it is unfair for those gamers who tend to get stuck in games with players who follow your examples.

I chose my side as Kurzicks, but I also played as Luxions, yet I never sabotaged anyones battles. I have two points here,

1. I agree that players who quit should be griven a penalty of somekind. No excuse. If you get a phone call, take a piss, or whatever, no one says you have to leave the mission. there is no penilty when you die.

2. Once you befrind a side, either Kurzick or Luxion, or what ever your guild chooses as their alliance side, you can only do alliance battles for that side. In the case where a pve player befriends both sides, if you gain one's faction you should lose double the others to what you gained.

Chris Blackstar · Mar 29, 2006, 02:43 PM // 14:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by General Typhus

My version of fun happens to involve unsportsmanlike conduct. Damn near every prank you've been hit with in guild wars has been concocted or tried by me and friends. My record was not due to "friends" joining the Kurziks and sabotaging them. This was ONE instance, not a repeated offense.

Do you ever listen to your self write, dam near ever prank ever done in GW, YOU or YOUR FRIENDS started. That would mean other players follow your example, then so on and so forth. Except your example is not constructive, but destructive behavior.

Being mature is to understand that your actions have consequences, you may think it is all in good fun, but others may not. Also many players are young and not mature, they will just follow your examples, and could care less who they effect.

Maybe you should take your own advice Typhus, and GROW UP

JoDiamonds · Mar 29, 2006, 05:09 PM // 17:09

Punishing people is silly. It doesn't accomplish much and just makes people unhappy.

I'm strongly in favor of #1 or #2, allowing Human or Henchmen replacements. I think players should have the option of jumping in as a single player as a replacement. Given how much it sucks to lose players, I think some noble-feeling people would happily sign up to jump in. Plus, you get more faction in a shorter amount of time, so I imagine the hard-core faction-farmers would actually prefer this. (Since it's pretty random which battle you'll end up in, it's not like it's especially exploitable.)

Kool Pajamas · Mar 29, 2006, 05:17 PM // 17:17

Why is it silly? If you put in a time penalty it keeps the sabotagers from doing it over and over. If you dont leave then there is no problem.

Putting in hench or people replacments would still be good but we REALLY need to have a time penalty for leavers.

Thom · Mar 29, 2006, 09:55 PM // 21:55

We don't really need any time of penalty. Unless you can magically determine good people quitting for good reasons from raging and pranking people, don't start throwing around penalties.

The ability to quit without hurting your team is infinitely more helpful to everyone then punishing people who may or may not deserve it. If you have never left a battle in order to do something else ingame, please raise your hand.

Tuoba Hturt Eht · Apr 02, 2006, 01:17 PM // 13:17

Rwar!
Behold!
Fear!

I hereby summon forth a forum necromancer and raise this semi-dead thread back to life!

New threads that are somewhat related to this topic as well
(Shut Your Mouth) Penalizing the (spies) leaver in all PvP areas
(twicky_kid) 12v12 needs to be reworked <first post not related, but some of the replies are>
(LaserLight) Honor/Infamy - Repairing 12v12 Battles

MasterDinadan · Apr 02, 2006, 01:34 PM // 13:34

COMBINE numbers 2, 4, and 5...
and you've got a killer suggestion

As for 2 though, instead of our generic henchies (i.e. Generic monk leaves and Alesia pops in...) perhaps it just makes a Doppelganger NPC (like the one you fight to ascend) that has the same skills as the quitter, so there's really no change at all except the player is now AI controlled (hopefully improve the AI's use of certain skills if this happens)
Number 4 is great because there is no way to "save time" by quitting an Alliance battle. Perhaps even stop the quitter from doing ANYTHING while the Alliance battle is still happening. He can't abandon the match because his guild wants him to join them for GvG or something, he won't be able to enter another mission at all until the alliance battle concludes.
Number 5 is good because again, it keeps people from just scamperring off when they know they will lose... because if they stay and lose they will receive more of a reward than if they leave and lose.

Tuoba Hturt Eht · Apr 11, 2006, 11:44 PM // 23:44

Thread revived again.
Why? People replied in one of the reference threads.

mariano · Apr 13, 2006, 10:21 AM // 10:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tuoba Hturt Eht

A new poll,
that something(non-punishing, non-penalty method) must be done to fix this issue of rage quiters in 12 vs 12 Alliance Battles.

Well, I can agree. With this "something(non-punishing, non-penalty method) must be done to fix this issue of rage quiters in 12 vs 12 Alliance Battles".

I suggest to make map travel disable when a player is in a mission with other players. This suggestion would apply to all missions either PvE or PvP, and obviusly it would apply too to the Arenas, to GvG, and to HA.

If a player wants or needs to leave during a mission, her will have to log-off. But, this is, I think, is quite reasonable. Notice again that "Disable map travel during missions" is a suggestion for all kind of missions in the game!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tuoba Hturt Eht

The old poll,
that Alliance Battles deserters should be punished:

I disagree with this. I prefer to understand the deserters problem in a rol playing way. So that desertion by a character is a part of the story of the battle; add whatever you think may be pertinent in this rol playing sense.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tuoba Hturt Eht

There are now two polls:
(new) 1. Do or not do something about the issue of rage quiting mofos
(old) 2. Punish or not punish the rage quiting mofos

What does "mofos" stand for?

Tuoba Hturt Eht · Apr 13, 2006, 10:28 AM // 10:28

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mofo

Quote:

MoFo
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Mofo)
Jump to: navigation, search

MoFo may stand for:

* Motherf*cker, a profane slang term
* Mozilla Foundation, a non-profit software development organization
* Morrison & Foerster LLP, a law firm in San Francisco, USA

I'm refering to the first term

There ya go.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mariano

I prefer to understand the deserters problem in a rol playing way. So that desertion by a character is a part of the story of the battle; add whatever you think may be pertinent in this rol playing sense.

Mate, I don't quite get what you are trying to imply here. Could you elaborate more in detail?

Cheers.

Updated original post with mariano's suggestion.

mariano · Apr 13, 2006, 10:56 AM // 10:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tuoba Hturt Eht

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mofo
I'm refering to the first term

There ya go.

Ohh. Thank you for the clarification!

I should have consulted myself the wikipedia.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tuoba Hturt Eht

Mate, I don't quite get what you are trying to imply here. Could you elaborate more in detail?

I mean this, if you were going to write down a chronicle of a battle, then talking about that some people deserted would be a part of the story in its own. A battle may be lost because deserters (or may be not) this becomes history.

Now, understanding things in this way, it could be though other ways to manage with the problem of desertion, like what has been talked about substituting the quiters with hench or with other players, as these could be understood as reinforcements.

For this, there should be some conditions, for example, like: reinforcements may come if there are 3-4 or more desertions and the team has got a moral boost. I think, this would be a reason to follow fighting, having some excitement about whether help will come or not... if they come in time or not... or they might never come.

P.S.: A farther comment. I think, that some other game has a feature called "karma" to penalize players who abuse others, but, I think that this does not fit well in Guild Wars. Penalizations like, not allowing a player to enter the game, or not a allowing a player to enter a mission, during some time, are too hard in my view. And penalizations like resting experience or factions are too weak in my view.

Faer · Aug 31, 2007, 03:29 PM // 15:29

http://www.guildwarsguru.com/forum/showthread.php?p=3095214#post3095214

Locking this thread, and all the other "Fix Leavers" threads in Sardelac, for the time being. When the new system is revealed, we'll look at it, look at these threads, and see if they need reopened or not. Until then, let's all be patient and see what we get.