Community > Community Events
"The Cogs" Ruleset
Machiavelliest:
--- Quote from: Captain Smollett on May 15, 2013, 01:02:19 pm ---See this would actually encourage teams to camp their own spawn and never move. You don't need to flee to get out of combat, you just need to get two kills. I can't imagine how frustrated a team would be to charge a team camping their spawn, mortally wound a 1200 permahull galleon, die in the process, charge back at the enemy spawn again to try to finish the wounded Galleon and kill the teammate only to find the Galleon standing with full health.
--- End quote ---
This deserves to be brought up again. If on initial contact red team kills both of the blue team, it's then a race for them to suicide in time to invalidate any of the work the blue team did. It's obviously an exploit since it drives the game toward killing yourself to gain an advantageous position, and suicide after kills now becomes the Meta. If Muse had intended ships to reset after one side was killed, they would already do that.
It's poor sportsmanship, an exploit, and a terrible direction for the game wrapped in to one. I'm kind of surprised there's even a discussion about it as if it was a legitimate tactic in any way. Swallow, if you've already said yourself it's "immoral" and might lead to an obnoxious and frustrating, possibly game-breaking problem later, don't you have any cognitive dissonance about supporting, if not encouraging it?
knoxi:
Anyone else starting to wonder how this (the issue of suicide) is ... or ever was even a discussion? Seeing that there are obviously a hundred one reasons why it shouldn't be allowed and no good reason why it should be, other than to be disrespectful or create drama or a plethora of other negative things that this community has done so amazingly well thus far to avoid. My mind is beginning to boggle.
Squash:
Knoxi, it's because of this: http://www.twitch.tv/qwerty2jam/b/402287974
Go to 1:40:30 and you'll see the first time in a competitive match it was used. I don't think anyone's saying "Black Flight shouldn't of done it", but the question that people asked is "should this be allowed?" Swallow recently said in this forum the answer is "Yes, it is allowed", and so people are questioning that. That's what this thread is for.
So that's why!
Brick Hardcastle:
I'm glad Smollett elaborated on things a little. This isn't really about The Paddling or BFS. We were just the ones who let the genie out of the bottle who opened pandora's box, causing all the worms contained in all the cans in the world to burst out.
A great deal of the arguments for and against this tactic are based on speculation at this point. I'm pretty sure that's why Swallow is continuing to allow it. It could turn out to be an occasional risk/reward tactic that sometimes goes horribly wrong, or it could indeed be something everyone uses all the time that breaks the game and has to be changed. Thing is, changing the Cogs or the mechanics of GoI based on one moment in one game is pretty dramatic, and I can see why Swallow and Muse would go with the "wait and see" approach instead. Personally, I don't have any particular attachment to suicide tactics one way or the other, and I'll adapt to the changes best I can on the rocky road to GoI becoming more well-balanced.
knoxi:
--- Quote from: Squash on May 17, 2013, 09:31:52 am ---Knoxi, it's because of this: http://www.twitch.tv/qwerty2jam/b/402287974
Go to 1:40:30 and you'll see the first time in a competitive match it was used. I don't think anyone's saying "Black Flight shouldn't of done it", but the question that people asked is "should this be allowed?" Swallow recently said in this forum the answer is "Yes, it is allowed", and so people are questioning that. That's what this thread is for.
So that's why!
--- End quote ---
Yeah, I've watched the match. I understand that it's impossible to punish a team for something that isn't against the rules of a competition, not sure if I somehow implied that, if so it wasn't intentional.
And I've been listening to people asking the "...should this be allowed?" question a lot...
My retort is, "Why is, in any sane world, the question even being asked?", let alone being dragged out for this long.
Deliberately suiciding to bypass hull damage is against the spirit of the community, the spirit of sportsmanship, the spirit of competition, and allowed or not it's still an exploit by any definition.
And the sad fact is, everyone knows, having seen that video, that this was not the first time Black Flight have done this. It was calculated, planned, and well executed with intent knowing they needed to suicide and knowing they needed to do so whilst hidden, whilst avoiding damage to not be penalised a death. How many public games was this used in prior to this ... and how many after? In other games we're all familiar with, not reporting and then exploting is a bannable offense.
Yet seemingly intelligent and respectful people are "asking" whether this should be allowed... whilst others defend it or try and validate it. To what end? Why?
The only reason I can come up with is, it made a stream and competition narrative seem a little more exciting. At the cost of what? Everyone rushing to suicide after each engagement to try and get the upper hand on permahull that's exploited to no longer be permanent.
Stop asking whether it should be allowed and thereby validating it. Ask whether you want to be taking part in a competition where exploiting is not only condoned but heralded as intelligent and innovative. Sure, don't punish Black Flight for exploiting, but to then create a situation where teams will be punished if they don't ... with no intention to offend, I find that disgusting and I doubt I'm the only one.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version