You are not logged in.

Dear visitor, welcome to Tagoria. If this is your first visit here, please read the Help. It explains in detail how this page works. To use all features of this page, you should consider registering. Please use the registration form, to register here or read more information about the registration process. If you are already registered, please login here.

Lady K

Professional

  • "Lady K" started this thread

Posts: 777

Location: Stockport, UK

Occupation: System Developer

  • Send private message

1

Saturday, August 22nd 2009, 8:13pm

XP battles

Ok, as I have instructed a number of conversations relating to this issue to ' take it to the forum' I thought id start the thread.

Ok what do players think about hordes hitting other hordes only for xp?

I understand it if it is a pre arranged 'friendly' but not keen that hordes such as cls are being hit, only for xp.

Part of the reason I play tag is for the horde battles, i dont fight for xp alone and in a horde with no allies, like the fact i get to choose which battles I am in.

I do understand the purpose behind these, but dont necessarily agree with them. If you come out with say 8 xp, was it worth it? especially if you have been sat in camp for say 12 hours?

Anyway, not having a go, just starting a thread

Agaroth

Trainee

Posts: 104

Location: Scotland Somewhere

  • Send private message

2

Saturday, August 22nd 2009, 10:48pm

Obviously the big issue right now is surrounding PRO vs 'XXX horde' and I will try to address this from our point of view. I have tried to put forward my argument as eloquently as I can but I imagine that my prose will fail me at times.

Let us first remember W1 as it was around 6 months ago:

  1. Though the number of active players was declining slightly, there was still a large proportion of active players in normal hordes.
  2. The number of good, active hordes was much larger than it is now.
  3. There were many good horde rivalries with horde attacks and counter attacks happening every few days. These battles were a source of excitement and there were many close and hard fought battles with everyone as a winner.


What is the face of W1 now?

  1. The number of active players has dropped off quite a bit, with many members either leaving or selling their accounts. This has changed the ratio of normal horde members : mercs and not for the better. From my count, 17 players from the top 25 are either in merc hordes or hordes that do not declare.
  2. Many of the more active and strong hordes have now either disappeared altogether, merged with another horde or turned into a merc horde. I'll try to list the hordes that have done so off the top of my head: Calguns, SMASH, Metal, MCP and DARK. There are also hordes that are looking like a shadow of their former selves though i won't name them.
  3. Many of the rivalries between the two major alliances have now gone. Does everyone remember the days of SMASH vs JAW, EoD vs JAW, EoD vs NVC, MCP vs NVC, SiN vs Metal, Calguns vs Metal, Calguns vs HoD and the others which i may have forgotten? Though a few new hordes have popped up, they cannot make up for the quality of all the hordes that have now gone (this point is not a criticism of the new hordes).



By no means am I saying that the members of these hordes above owe it to us to keep hordes going or stay in the regular horde business. Nor am i saying that it is anybody's fault for the deterioration of the horde setup in W1 (except maybe GAS with the DARK business).

Unfortunately, what this does mean is that there really aren't many targets for PRO to go after to get xp. It's a shame that the hordes that would give us the most xp are nearly all merc hordes, but since that is where the xp lies then we think we are entitled to attack them.

Lady K puts forward the thought that a battle resulting in 8xp isn't really worth it. I put it to her that since this xp costs the horde members nothing more than the cost of the healing hut (sunk cost), declaring cost and maybe a camp list I don't see why it wouldn't be worth it for us. In fact, due to the sunk cost (a cost which cannot be recovered) of the healing hut, the more we declare battles, the more it has been worth it to upgrade it.

Another point to consider is that battles are a large part of this game. With the decline in the number of good, strong hordes in W1 we're maybe lucky to see one good battle a week. Hopefully, through the sheer number of battles we are declaring this depressing point can be adressed.

We don't declare with the intent of causing angst, only for the purposes of gaining xp and having a good battle. Though we're sorry that our declaring may cause annoyance to some hordes, it certainly won't stop us from declaring on them.


At the end of the day if you don't want to be declared on, you shouldn't be in a horde. It's as simple as that.

3

Saturday, August 22nd 2009, 11:23pm

I couldnt add anything to what Ag has said even if i tried.

All of our facts and points are there, what Ag has stated above completely outlines what we stand for.

About the only thing i would like to make clear is that we ARE NOT doing this to annoy people, in particular i had alot of respect for myr and gry, i dont know emc too well but i know that all these 3 players have decided to make their opinions well known on the SB.

I honestly thought that we could expect more from seasoned veterans than childish playground remarks about the actions of another. However i wasnt expecting our venture to go so smoothly that we didnt recieve some sort of complaint!

I would like to make a point in saying that if a horde can state that they cannot be declared upon then i can state that a horde can declare on anyone....

The reason for me stating this??..................... What is it?...................... They're just words. One persons views conflicting anothers. The same way as saying if you dont want to be attacked dont be in a horde.


Theres no special button you can press that prevents another horde from attacking you, if there was the game would be dead already.

LaidBeatle

Intermediate

Posts: 238

Location: Berlin

Occupation: Bartender

  • Send private message

4

Sunday, August 23rd 2009, 2:12am

clear and simple:

we attack any horde that has XP to give us. if you dont like it, disband your horde, or live with it. that's it, this is the way the game was designed, if you dont like it, go home.

5

Sunday, August 23rd 2009, 2:53am

sounds like w1 is going to the way of w2 as well ... fewer active hordes, fewer rivalries, fewer exciting nail-gripping battles.

i think this discussion about merc hordes has happened before in the forums?

essentially i agree, if you are in a horde you are liable to be attacked, regardless of whether you claim you are a merc horde or not. the game mechanics does not allow you to refuse to be attacked.

there are mechanics to avoid being merc jacked against an ally horde e.g. not putting your offer up till the other party is ready to hire, but horde attacks are fair game.

i do not see much advantage in being in a merc horde except having a fancy title; if you are high lvl there is not additional need for advertisement as the horde warlords know who to look for when they need mercs. if you want to enjoy banding together in your horde chat and having a fancy name, then you should be ready to fight horde battles.

edit : you don't need to sit 12 hours in a horde camp, just work for 9 hours and get a sitter to put you in!

Lady K

Professional

  • "Lady K" started this thread

Posts: 777

Location: Stockport, UK

Occupation: System Developer

  • Send private message

6

Sunday, August 23rd 2009, 12:58pm

curious, this isnt so much about 'merc' hordes and 'merc jacking'.

I know some of the comments on the sb have been a little 'touchy' and i can see both sides.

I like to get my xp, the way i choose to get it but i also understand that at the heady heights of the top levels, its not that easy to come by. In the same vein though, I also kind of feel that 'well thats not my problem, players choose to power level to be on top'...


I just hope that this doesnt leave as much bad blood as some of the previous 'horde issues' ie super alliences and suicide hordes etc.. I also hope it doesnt cause yet more players to quit

falcotron

Professional

Posts: 786

Location: San Francisco

Occupation: software developer/musician

  • Send private message

7

Sunday, August 23rd 2009, 2:57pm

I like to get my xp, the way i choose to get it
And so do we. That's really all there is to it.

That's the whole agenda. And we've tried very hard to be accommodating. We don't declare anywhere near other battles, so we won't ruin anyone's merc contracts. Hordes that have contacted us and asked to schedule the battle at a time convenient for them, we've done it. We've even agreed to fight hordes that don't have much or any xp for us, hoping that we can get the other 53s to pile in (and we have--although personally, I'd prefer to attack the 53s directly, so they get the benefit of their own healing hut).

But those who don't want to deal with us--well, you're going to have to, whether you want to or not. Come to us and make favorable terms for yourself, or blow a bunch of amber and diamonds that could have been used on your members' characters to make sure you get less free xp; we're happy either way.

As Okara said in another thread, and as I've said many times in the HW forums, if you don't want to be attacked, don't have a horde. There is no purpose to merc hordes anyway.
Top accounts for sale: TG1 (or the gear) and AI1
Already sold: HW1/2/3/4 TG1DE

Lady K

Professional

  • "Lady K" started this thread

Posts: 777

Location: Stockport, UK

Occupation: System Developer

  • Send private message

8

Sunday, August 23rd 2009, 5:54pm

But those who don't want to deal with us--well, you're going to have to, whether you want to or not. Come to us and make favorable terms for yourself, or blow a bunch of amber and diamonds that could have been used on your members' characters to make sure you get less free xp; we're happy either way.
wow, now they are harsh, aggressive words there.

I have been trying to see both side on this thread and throughout the recent issue on the sb. I have also been trying not to make this about PRO vs CLS but I think my eyes are a little more open now.

I do understand that this is a war game, I also understand the consequences of being in a horde . I dont appeciate being forced into someone elses game play. I have seen many horde vs horde issues and have ridden through it. Has this made me re-think my position in tag...

End of story

Agaroth

Trainee

Posts: 104

Location: Scotland Somewhere

  • Send private message

9

Sunday, August 23rd 2009, 8:03pm

I wouldn't say that those words are aggressive, harsh maybe, but the fact is that it is the truth. Any horde that PRO can gain ep from should expect to be attacked with no exception.

Also if you read my first post again, you would see that there are many viable reasons why PRO is declaring on these hordes.

10

Monday, August 24th 2009, 11:09pm

Let me just ask you one question: Since when was it fair that players who were amongst the top elite got paid alot for hammering down on hordes that didnt have the power nor the economy to defend themselves?

Let me write it to you ladies and gents, with all do respect: You take payment for attacking someone, yet you ask others to not touch your horde? Whats your message to the community? That everyone should tixx and spend loads of diamonds on mercs? How deep pockets do you think everyone have?

To someone who mentioned they wanted to be in the battles they choose for, and i think that was Lady K, what about those hordes you have been hired to take care of, I am sure they did not choose some of those battles. They were probably stabbed in their back in the middle of the night with pockets full of amberstones from work.

This is a pvp game, I think that is what you would have told ppl who have written hatemails to you for hitting them.

Surely GAS designed the game so ppl can be mercs, but never was the intension to be a merc on 100% full time in the game.


Personal note: I strongly dislike ppl who hides themselves behind rules they make up in their own best interest.

11

Tuesday, August 25th 2009, 12:16am

Hordes choose to hire mercs - the hordes getting attacked may not have choosen to get steamrolled.
They should what, declare themselves as merc hordes in order to get some peace?
We all know the ranks of our most active bunch of mercs and how well geared they are.

I havent seen you say anything about the hordes you steamroll for diamonds. You honestly find it fair that they never declare on your horde?

12

Tuesday, August 25th 2009, 12:37am

In other words you do not have any comments on my last question? Despite my many attempts?

So you do agree that you can get paid from horde A in diamonds, tixx and what not - to pound on horde B. Yet it is unfair when horde B declares on your horde, according to you.
Enjoy the game.

emc002

Unregistered

13

Tuesday, August 25th 2009, 12:59am

I recognize all the other names posting here and respect their opinions even if they're wrong.
But who exactly are you in W1 McKenzie?

14

Tuesday, August 25th 2009, 1:33am

Well the debate started after CLS got hit, didnt it?
I dont see no other hordes complaining.

15

Tuesday, August 25th 2009, 1:44am

I'm curious as to whether CLS refuse(d/s) to be hired as mercs when the hiring horde (was/is) fighting a horde that has asked not to be declared against and/or is dead and/or has some other reason why they should be exempt from battles.

16

Tuesday, August 25th 2009, 4:10am

It's a game that allows one horde to attack another. Attacking and getting attacked is part of the game.

So the real question here is this... are hordes required to be bound to an implied promise? Was it proper for CLS to assume that because they were asked if they wanted to be attacked, that saying no implied that PRO was bound to an agreement that they wouldn't attack? If there is a moral obligation to such an implied agreement, and what consequences, if any, are there for breaking it?

I understand there are squishy human feelings involved here... but the game rules are pretty simple. One horde is allowed to attack another.

The bank can evict you from your house if you don't pay your mortgage. Even if you aren't paying your mortgage because you spent 6 months in the hospital after your car was hit by a drunk driver being chased by a police car. Is it fair? Is it right? It doesn't matter. It's legal. The sooner that is accepted, the sooner we can move to a fun conversation about the finer points of Str vs. Sta and the effect of glowies on the balance of the game.

17

Tuesday, August 25th 2009, 4:23am

Quoted

Let me just ask you one question: Since when was it fair that players who were amongst the top elite got paid alot for hammering down on hordes that didnt have the power nor the economy to defend themselves?

Let me write it to you ladies and gents, with all do respect: You take payment for attacking someone, yet you ask others to not touch your horde? Whats your message to the community? That everyone should tixx and spend loads of diamonds on mercs? How deep pockets do you think everyone have?
This is a really good point. These high level players hammer the rest of us, but them QQing about getting forced into fights they didn't choose is a delicious irony.

Quoted

I recognize all the other names posting here and respect their opinions even if they're wrong.
But who exactly are you in W1 McKenzie?
Why does everyone keep asking who McKenzy is? Who cares? Are you not going to respect his points simply because you know who s/he is? Identity does not change the validity of the points.

The person is expressing good points. He could be a drunken monkey with a typewriter -- it doesn't change the quality of the ideas expressed. Why don't you deal with the intellectual arguments instead of trying to personalize it? Don't turn an intellectual exercise into a which hunt. After all we aren't cavemen.... errr.... yeah.

This post has been edited 2 times, last edit by "Babushka" (Aug 25th 2009, 6:38am)


18

Tuesday, August 25th 2009, 4:25am

Thanks for not contributing anything useful to the conversation....it is a refreshing post.. completely irrelevant.. but refreshing...

I have nothing left to contribute here myself....
Thanks! Likewise.

19

Tuesday, August 25th 2009, 4:55am

btw didn't you just post that you had no use for this stuff?
I did, and I don't. My point in this thread is the same as the other... basically "!?!?!?!?!!?!" The game allows one horde to attack another, so what's the big deal?

All this gobbeldy-gook about "is it ok", "is it fair", "you said I said", "but you are a big fat head", "you ruined the world by playing a game", "let's vote on it", blah blah blah is irrelevant. The game allows players to attack players and hordes to attack other hordes. In fact, it encourages these things as mechanism for advancing your character. I don't like waiting 10 minutes to see what I plundered either, but I deal with that too... it's part of the flavor of the game.

Whatever your reasons for being in a horde, it's still a choice to be in a horde. Non-consensual horde battles are part of Tagoria.

What am I missing?

20

Tuesday, August 25th 2009, 6:32am

(Sorry this is so long. I just respect Myr as a player. I wanted to show my respect by explaining my POV.)

Myr, I appreciate you as a player with dedication, honor, and even "niceness". (Please don't let that insult the battle part of your penquin.) Personally, I probably play by much the same rules as you do. I attack other players for EP/XP and AS. When they ask me to stop, if they've asked in a way that's not offensive, I stop! Am I required to stop? No. I just don't get my thrills by making someone else miserable. There are more personally satisfying ways for me to earn my AS and EP. Like you, if someone makes it known that they don't want to be attacked, and they aren't doing anything to provoke me, I won't attack them.

But these "rules" are self imposed. I don't hold other people to them... and for a good reason! It's more fun for me if I don't! I know that seems counter intuitive, so let me explain.

If I were getting pounded by another player, I might ask them to stop attacking me. But just because I asked doesn't mean they have to oblige me. If they continue, I know there are mechanisms I can use to defend myself - being in camp, keeping a SF active, saving AS as healies to sell, getting help from friends, etc. Meanwhile, I can plot my revenge... and coming back from the underdog position is some of the most fun you can have in any game. At least, IMHO it is. Denying them the option to be a jerk denies me the opportunity to do something "epic".

Indeed, it's this tension, this sense of danger - that I might face some adversity - that makes the game fun... for *me*. If the game allowed people to "opt out" of being attacked by simply declaring themselves neutral, it would remove an element of the game I think is fun... not because I think attacking self proclaimed neutrals is fun or because I like tormenting other people, but because the risk of being tormented spices up the game (for me). If you took that away, you would change the game in a way that hurts my enjoyment of it. In other words, I'm glad there are jerks out there who upset me. It gives me targets and some sense of self righteousness.

"Just because you can doesn't mean you should" is very true. But removing the option doesn't just protect you, or harm the people you might think are unrighteous, it takes something away from me. I know you are not a selfish player, and I believe that if you realize this it might change your mind on the matter.

I'm not asking you to change how you play... I'm just asking that you recognize that just because you want to play a certain way doesn't oblige others to play by your rules. Indeed, that would hurt a truly neutral 3rd party (me!). The rules we have to play by are already outlined in the user agreement and the software - that's what we all agreed to when we started playing.

If some group of players is peeving you, then rally and make them regret their choice. Personally, I am sympathetic to your situation, and in a battle I would fight for you. Indeed, I think I did volunteer for CLS in the PRO battle. So while I support you in battle, I also agree with PRO's right to attack. (It's kind of like free speech - I support other people's right to say things I don't like.)

Maybe you just need to find a way to fight PRO? I'm new to the game, and I don't know all the mechanics, but why does CLS even have to show up for the fight at all? Play dead. Pass the AS to members to be stored as healies, then don't enter camp. They won't have anyone to fight and won't get any EP or AS for their 24 hour attack cooldown. If the game requires people to show up in camp, then show up with 2 life so they won't get much of a battle out of you. Or have your "XP Cows" leave the horde if it gets attacked. If they are really after XP, take it away from them... remove their motivation.

Anyhow... I just wanted to let you know that while I'm advocating for the rights of hordes to engage one another in battle, it doesn't mean I am not sympathetic to your situation. Also, I have really thick skin, and a very impersonal mindset - it would be hard for you to offend me even if you tried.

I know that you are focuses on the "moral" issue, and almost all I've mentioned is the "horde attacking horde" issue. Ultimately, it's because I just don't see what you want as a resolution on the behavior issue. Do you want PRO to repent, apologize, and admit that they were rude? Should the whole W1 TAG community speak up and condemn one side or the other? :: Shrug :: These things don't interest me. I prefer my bad guys bad and my good guys good. A game that centers on player vs player combat benefits from a good old fashioned blood feud!

This post has been edited 1 times, last edit by "Babushka" (Aug 25th 2009, 6:54am)


21

Tuesday, August 25th 2009, 8:45am

wow, you guys all need to take a step a back, TAG is a role playing game with a personal element via sb, pms and hordes. Sounds like w1 is more about personal and less about RPG. QQing about being attacked because someone wrote 'do not attack' in their profile (horde or character) but accepting payment to attack someone else is somewhat ludicrous.

Good thread btw, like a reality TV show about a dysfunctional family, most entertaining.

Shaaaaroon!

LaidBeatle

Intermediate

Posts: 238

Location: Berlin

Occupation: Bartender

  • Send private message

22

Tuesday, August 25th 2009, 8:52am


So in closing.... nah.. I'm done wasting my breath here... My thoughts on many things are on my horde profile..



I am done here. There is no point in continuing this conversation.<br>
<br>
Good luck to you,



I have nothing left to contribute here myself....



I believe I will take a bit of a hiatus from the forums. I don't believe my presence here would serve any positive purpose for the time being*waddles off*<br>

This post has been edited 1 times, last edit by "LaidBeatle" (Aug 25th 2009, 9:15am)


LaidBeatle

Intermediate

Posts: 238

Location: Berlin

Occupation: Bartender

  • Send private message

23

Tuesday, August 25th 2009, 9:16am

*points up


for someone that claims to have stated everything there is to say, you cant quite seem to let it go can you, myr? i thought this topic was done with, yet im still waking up to lengthy PMs....

24

Tuesday, August 25th 2009, 11:41am

*points up


for someone that claims to have stated everything there is to say, you cant quite seem to let it go can you, myr? i thought this topic was done with, yet im still waking up to lengthy PMs....
-1 Troll.

25

Tuesday, August 25th 2009, 12:19pm

Quoted
Let me just ask you one question: Since when was it fair that players who were amongst the top elite got paid alot for hammering down on hordes that didnt have the power nor the economy to defend themselves?

Let me write it to you ladies and gents, with all do respect: You take payment for attacking someone, yet you ask others to not touch your horde? Whats your message to the community? That everyone should tixx and spend loads of diamonds on mercs? How deep pockets do you think everyone have?



This is a really good point. These high level players hammer the rest of us, but them QQing about getting forced into fights they didn't choose is a delicious irony.

:)

Like I said in another post, hordes that take money for attacking other hordes are an equal subject to be attacked - and that is fairness.

26

Tuesday, August 25th 2009, 9:56pm

What? *laughs*
Did I actually read that from Gry.

Seriously come up with something more intelligent than that dear ;)

fscottnational

SB Moderator EN

Posts: 189

Location: Chicago, Illinois

Occupation: Human Resources

  • Send private message

27

Monday, August 31st 2009, 4:26pm

Jesus Frakin' Christ! Who cares if you attack or don't attack! Just don't try to justify it with some lame, "We're doing it for XP" garbage...

There's nothing noble in attacking without provocation. It's even less noble when you try to justify it with some lame excuse. But, this is a game, and almost every player knows that if you're in a horde, sooner or later you'll get attacked. So, shame on PRO for the BS they're spewing, and shame on everyone else who has a problem with them attacking.

What a completely ridiculous argument on BOTH sides...
I am fscottnational and I APPROVE this message! :thumbsup: