Relic Defence
#41
Posted 26 November 2010 - 15:53
That was sent to me by a Cow.
We're not allowed to attack them, full stop. And if we dont listen?
All players who have issued a report to us regarding this shall be informed to report any further abuse from this Guild, anything we deem as abusive shall result in further action being taken
#42 fs_phyrstormz
Posted 26 November 2010 - 15:54
starting in 2011, leveling is illegal, it might offend someone
#43
Posted 26 November 2010 - 15:58
That's a bunch of cowpoop, and i've seen it more than once. If threats and abusive language accompany the hit i dont have a problem with it. But I've seen this a lot where that didn't apply.Please cease all attacks from this Guild to others
That was sent to me by a Cow.
We're not allowed to attack them, full stop. And if we dont listen?
All players who have issued a report to us regarding this shall be informed to report any further abuse from this Guild, anything we deem as abusive shall result in further action being taken
Hourly 100 stams are allowed by game mechanics, no reason is needed to be given or implied. There are game mechanics in place to counter said attacks: Bounty and take 5 levels, repeatedly if needed.
Having a dev tell me I cant attack someone just because they sent in a ticket and cried is cowpoop!!!
#44
Posted 26 November 2010 - 15:58
...
I'd remove that, you're not allowed to quote (and discuss?) tickets.
EDIT: but what the raspberry, sometimes it's needed =P
#45 fs_phyrstormz
Posted 26 November 2010 - 15:59
...
I'd remove that, you're not allowed to quote (and discuss?) tickets.
you cant sneeze without a warning....
#46
Posted 26 November 2010 - 16:01
...
I'd remove that, you're not allowed to quote (and discuss?) tickets.
EDIT: but what the raspberry, sometimes it's needed =P
It wasnt a ticket, it was a PM sent to me by a Cow.
#47
Posted 26 November 2010 - 16:07
#48 fs_regnier7
Posted 26 November 2010 - 16:08
yup, mostly between guilds who both have access to the resources and don't need to fight over them.No, that is childishness.
Diplomacy is the agreements made due to deterrence of attacks. Whether explicit or implicit these agreements are an essential part of relic defense.
Aside from allies, I don't really think there's anymore official relic agreements anyhow. lol
Moreso a mutual understanding between guilds since taking the others relic only means possible loss of your own and no real benefit.
#49
Posted 26 November 2010 - 16:11
...
I'd remove that, you're not allowed to quote (and discuss?) tickets.
EDIT: but what the raspberry, sometimes it's needed =P
It wasnt a ticket, it was a PM sent to me by a Cow.
I've started to wonder if this is just an attempt to keep everyone happy, but what it does is making people insecure about how to interpretate the rules (I mean the game mechanics allows it, how do I know when I'm braking some rule that isn't stated in the user agreement?). Does it matter who's looking at the "situation" and what mood their in? Introducing a subjective aspect to this is probably causing more load on the admins (who should be focusing on _real_ problems in game such as real life threats, people using more than one account etc).
#50
Posted 26 November 2010 - 16:15
If frequent and constant 100 stamming is not allowed, then shouldn't it be fair that frequent and constant relic taking by the guild from another guild especially when it's a fully empowered relic, also not be allowed?
I disagree. A guild has every right to take a relic whenever they want. Is it rude and looked down on? Yes. Can it be used for childish reasons? Yes. But that is the risk a guild takes when they Empower a Relic. HCS has no place in telling a guild they can't take a relic. It may be a hard pill to swallow but that is just how it is and how it ought to be.
So, why should someone be told to stop 100 stamming someone else?
HCS has no place telling someone they cant attack another player when they give you a button to do just that.
They shouldn't be told that. HCS goes to far by intervening in 100 stams but it is what it is.
#51
Posted 26 November 2010 - 16:17
I disagree. A guild has every right to take a relic whenever they want. Is it rude and looked down on? Yes. Can it be used for childish reasons? Yes. But that is the risk a guild takes when they Empower a Relic. HCS has no place in telling a guild they can't take a relic. It may be a hard pill to swallow but that is just how it is and how it ought to be.
there is no issue with relics being taken as that is part of the game,, the issue is that the guild that has their relic taken has no way of defending the relic or retaliating against the guild that takes it
Read the post I quoted as referring to. It was towards a certain player not to the topic in general.
#52
Posted 26 November 2010 - 16:30
I've come across several Guilds who post their "philosophical" remarks in their profiles concerning Relics and abuse any particular Guild at any given time repeatedly; but when those Guilds get fed up with the instigation and finally do something about it (i.e. PVP etc.) those Guilds can call "harassment". Is it not harassment to be doing what these hypocrites are doing in the first place? Some may argue that taking Relics is all within the rules of the game, but isn't it just the same with PVP? They're both parts of the game, and if one Guild wishes to bring attention upon themselves and reveal that they have valid targets within their Guild for Members of that Guild to do so, they shouldn't be allowed to complain when such action is taken. Everyone has donated to the game through various means, purchased their Stamina, XP, and their respective Gains, and I see no reason why they cannot use their Stamina how they see fit, whether that be PVP, GVG, Hunting or otherwise. The means to protect themselves are made available to them through Equipment, XP Lock Upgrades and Bank Deposits, and so is the availability to Bounty their respective Attacker(s). So why should HCS even consider intervening?
#53
Posted 26 November 2010 - 17:34
#54 fs_gravely
Posted 26 November 2010 - 17:45
Also, attempts at a Bounty Board Battle have been deemed as abusing the PvP system. Please cease all attacks from this Guild to others, also please cease any attempts via players bio's or messages etc in attempts to save your Bounties for certain players.
This is UTTER BULLHOCKEY.
Wars have been waged in this fashion for as long as I have been in FS.
Administrators and / or developers need to comment on this, right now, as that is how I have always understood wars to operate.
There has to be a consistent policy in place, or you cannot expect players to follow it nor enforce it with any hope of success.
#55
Posted 26 November 2010 - 17:53
Also, attempts at a Bounty Board Battle have been deemed as abusing the PvP system. Please cease all attacks from this Guild to others, also please cease any attempts via players bio's or messages etc in attempts to save your Bounties for certain players.
This is UTTER BULLHOCKEY.
Wars have been waged in this fashion for as long as I have been in FS.
Administrators and / or developers need to comment on this, right now, as that is how I have always understood wars to operate.
There has to be a consistent policy in place, or you cannot expect or enforce it with any hope of success.
The only sustainable policy is the one implemented in game mechanics, otherwise there will always be room for someone-having-a-bad-day or only-getting-one-side-of-the-story kinda situations.
It should be about who manages to execute their tactic to the fullest, not who sends in a ticket first. =S
#56
Posted 26 November 2010 - 18:26
Lo and behold we got a message from support saying that we can no longer pvp any member of their guild because they received "complaints that we pvp'ed them because they took our relic". Um, I thought that Fallen Sword was a PVP game? I have been hearing this since the day I began playing. I thought that any player could attack any other player who is within their range at any time and for any reason. Isn't this true? This guild has essentially now "opted out" of any pvp activity from our guild. This is absolutely wrong, in my opinion. In a PvP game there can not be double standards made in relation to PvP.
We wanted to make them think twice about taking the relic by affecting some of their levelers. But now HCS has told us not to. Oh, and they've also told us that we can no longer put in our bio that we'd like to reserve bounties for certain players or guilds. I didn't read anywhere in the game rules where this was prohibited. Bounty Hunters are going to take the bounties they want. they are not required to respect wishes that someone makes in a bio.
HCS has done so much to help out the PVP aspect of the game and now they say that we cannot pvp against certain players. they are now establishing "guidelines" for what the proper "reasons" are for someone to engage in PvP. I thought that I didn't have to have a reason, that I could just "do it" if I wanted to because I felt like it. Guess not. I do not know exactly what HCS' reasons are here. they continually say that there is no favoritism showed to any player or guild over another. However, I have my suspicions of why a directive like this could occur. If an HCS member reads this particular post, I wouldn't mind having you explain why you would tell a guild that its members could not do PvP against certain players in a game where you continually say to us "it's a PvP game". Thanks. I know I rambled, but in my opinion HCS made a bad decision. Still love the game though.
#57
Posted 26 November 2010 - 18:32
#58
Posted 26 November 2010 - 18:36
#59
Posted 26 November 2010 - 18:36
#60
Posted 26 November 2010 - 18:50
It's very interesting that I open the forum and this is the first topic I see. I have not read any of the replies to this thread. Our guild, We Are Legends, has just had an experience with this exact topic. an unnamed guild began to continually take a relic that we held and empowered, so that our guild members could no longer gain the benefits. They usually chose to do so once people were hunting and we had RP packs going. Sure, relics are there to be taken by anyone, and that's cool. However, we decided to try hurting them by pvp'ing some of their members.
Lo and behold we got a message from support saying that we can no longer pvp any member of their guild because they received "complaints that we pvp'ed them because they took our relic". Um, I thought that Fallen Sword was a PVP game? I have been hearing this since the day I began playing. I thought that any player could attack any other player who is within their range at any time and for any reason. Isn't this true? This guild has essentially now "opted out" of any pvp activity from our guild. This is absolutely wrong, in my opinion. In a PvP game there can not be double standards made in relation to PvP.
We wanted to make them think twice about taking the relic by affecting some of their levelers. But now HCS has told us not to. Oh, and they've also told us that we can no longer put in our bio that we'd like to reserve bounties for certain players or guilds. I didn't read anywhere in the game rules where this was prohibited. Bounty Hunters are going to take the bounties they want. they are not required to respect wishes that someone makes in a bio.
HCS has done so much to help out the PVP aspect of the game and now they say that we cannot pvp against certain players. they are now establishing "guidelines" for what the proper "reasons" are for someone to engage in PvP. I thought that I didn't have to have a reason, that I could just "do it" if I wanted to because I felt like it. Guess not. I do not know exactly what HCS' reasons are here. they continually say that there is no favoritism showed to any player or guild over another. However, I have my suspicions of why a directive like this could occur. If an HCS member reads this particular post, I wouldn't mind having you explain why you would tell a guild that its members could not do PvP against certain players in a game where you continually say to us "it's a PvP game". Thanks. I know I rambled, but in my opinion HCS made a bad decision. Still love the game though.
Requests in bios have been used as long as I've played, and it's always been up to the hunters to respect those or just don't give a rats about it. I don't like this development ...
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users