A plea.

[Licinio Chiavari]

As someone ironized, we are running toward #42+ post all around same issues. Various kind of - perceived - exploits.

I, as anyone, have my opinion on each case.
And my, like anyone else's, opinions on these cases are, technically, not relevant.

Still, granted the number of cases posted, and taking into account that many are central mechanics of game (from how RvR is and should work to OW tagging and reinforcing) and granted that the days are passing... sincerely I think Devs/Admins need to stand clear on these issues.

 

It's not matter of punishment or not, exploits or not, griefing or not or whatever.

It's matter of rightful request of clear game rules and therefore rightful request to know how is and should be the game we are playing.
I'd add "conditio sine qua non" to have the least toxic and most enjoyable game that we all love to play.

I kindly ask and suggest to reply on these issues (again: what matters is not which reply, but a clear reply) as soon as possible.

 

Thanks in advance.

[Hethwill, the Red Duke]

Simple dirty fix IMO is - only the initial nations can join the battles in the OW. Any Hostility versus Neutrals, enemy nations can only join neutrals of course.

Simple dirty and proper.

 

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Hethwill said:

Simple dirty fix IMO is

Think its better to give hostility point to the clan that started the mission, so allied countries can help each other in hostility missions

[Hethwill, the Red Duke]

I am thinking ahead and closing all doors to some altmeta abuse. Both in OW pvp and in Hostility drive; which seem to be the flavour of the month.

[Licinio Chiavari]

1 hour ago, Hethwill said:

I am thinking ahead and closing all doors to some altmeta abuse. Both in OW pvp and in Hostility drive; which seem to be the flavour of the month.

On the other hand, some form of punishment for those exploiting (and knowing it was an exploit) should be advisable.

On the contrary anyone can feel allowed to exploit any game mechanic and he could legitimately complain if punished (so he has not to be punished): any double standard is 'per se' wrong.

Edited May 2, 2019 by Licinio Chiavari

[LegoLarry]

8 minutes ago, Licinio Chiavari said:

On the other hand, some form of punishment for those exploiting (and knowing it was an exploit) should be advisable.

On the contrary anyone can feel allowed to exploit any game mechanic and he could legitimately complain if punished (so he has not to be punished): any double standard is 'per se' wrong.

 

 Don't think ban is best way,  better to set good rules now about all issues and go on from now with all knowing what position is. Like laws in life break law go to jail, make so all know law somehow and then apply with open hand to all. Maybe make lose ships, one week game ban or whatever to stop temptation knowing result if caught.

 People can be stupid, people can be tempted, people can be just think that everything is within right to do if structure  allows.

 Better maybe to just set Law down now and put in loader so all know and move on with all knowledge what is allowed and not.

 Test is test so find bug is good, but to use bug again after found to anger people is not good, is stupid and not good for game in total.

 No more post from me is last, google translate is poor .

Edited May 2, 2019 by Doh

[Hethwill, the Red Duke]

 

[Licinio Chiavari]

14 minutes ago, Hethwill said:

 

Yes. So? Any decision so? Which one?
Because a rule not enforced is... not a rule.

Sincerely I tried to put it in the most soft, polite and even diplomatic way.

But a) it is still missing a clear statement both on OW battle join BR exploits, and b) about third countries hostility mission (mis-)use, from the first (Santiago) to the later (against USA).
And c) any consequencies for (eventual) misconduct.

It's not my intention to move this thread again on the line of other flames... but I sincerely think a clear word and eventual action is required... for the sake of game and community environment.

[Hethwill, the Red Duke]

Test, find bugs, report. Simple. The more a bug benefits you the more reason to report it asap to see it fixed. That's how many early access players act. Guess striving to follow the good examples is always better than willing to follow the bad, because you will be as good as the good but, oh boy, you will become worse than the baddies.

So keep testing, keep reporting.

[Severus Snape]

Honestly I kinda like the ability for other nations to use hostility missions.  Creates sort of a mercenary role - perhaps only all pirates to do it.  It offers a little variety to the rubber stamp nation pirates currently are.  

[Angus MacDuff]

8 minutes ago, Louis Garneray said:

I'm done with that part after 3 years of doing it and no reward.

Reward is 3 years of game play.....and a Pandora every day.

[Sir Texas Sir]

3 hours ago, Wyy said:

Think its better to give hostility point to the clan that started the mission, so allied countries can help each other in hostility missions

I prefer to give the points to the nation that started the mission, not clan cause than an alt clan can still get a bunch of guys to jump in and help flip.  So you still have to be the clan that gets the most points out of all that are grinding. 

Example:

Group 1 has 5 US players of Clan A in it and are grinding hostility.

Group 2 has ALT clan and 4 Pirates

Group 3  has 5 US players but of 5 different clans.  

While they all do exactly 33% hostility it would break down like this.

33% Clan A

6.6% each will go to the 4 US players and the alt clan player  for a total of 39.6

26.4 will go to the nation agro, but to no clan cause of the 4 pirates.

Clan A has the most over all hostility so the port will go to theml, all the Pirates did was help them flip it faster.

   

3 hours ago, Hethwill said:

I am thinking ahead and closing all doors to some altmeta abuse. Both in OW pvp and in Hostility drive; which seem to be the flavour of the month.

Admin posted two good options that would work together.  The first one as I mention above the hostility goes to the nation of the player that started the mission.  Option two which should also be implemented is only friendly clans of the owner of the region can pull missions.  This will stop alt clan abuse.

[Licinio Chiavari]

1 hour ago, Hethwill said:

Test, find bugs, report. Simple. The more a bug benefits you the more reason to report it asap to see it fixed. That's how many early access players act. Guess striving to follow the good examples is always better than willing to follow the bad, because you will be as good as the good but, oh boy, you will become worse than the baddies.

So keep testing, keep reporting.

Morality is not on high ground today. In general. And NA is a mirror of society.

Dont forget that tolerated exploits post release could be deadly for the game.
And double standard tolerance in beta can be deadly in reviews and so the same for the release too.

That said: it's not matter of behaving well or not.
It's matter of KNOWING what is legit or not.

If a supposed exploit (or so wrongly perceived) is not punished means it is not an exploit and anyone can rightfully feel allowed to use it if need arises.

[Hammy]

Ok this topics seems to continue only for the nations it doesnt benefit. Until it's fixed we may aswell move on. I remember when there was a certain basic cutter exploit, how many of you used that..... test, report move on.

[Dragonfire]

Yea but I remember also it was test, report, stop using and if continued to use there were penalties. The stop using and penalty parts seem to have changed.

[Licinio Chiavari]

10 minutes ago, Dragonfire said:

Yea but I remember also it was test, report, stop using and if continued to use there were penalties. The stop using and penalty parts seem to have changed.

And it's not a secondary part.

In any case, the real point to me is: IS IT OR NOT AN EXPLOIT? simply yes/nay.

If it is... some action has to be taken.

If it is not... good: we will use it too if useful as long as the feature will exist code-wise.

[Licinio Chiavari]

52 minutes ago, Licinio Chiavari said:

If it is not... good: we will use it too if useful as long as the feature will exist code-wise.

Now we know it's NOT an exploit, but lawful use, even if not intended, of game features.

Let's go on.