Time for a poll. (The subject is abuse)

[Edratman]

Can someone explain "Filling lab with slave collars"? I'm a SP player and I can't even fathom the mechanics or how it would hurt an opponent.

[lch]

Edratman said:
Can someone explain "Filling lab with slave collars"? I'm a SP player and I can't even fathom the mechanics or how it would hurt an opponent.

Messages are sent before item forging occurs, which includes transfer of gems and magic items between nations. If somebody fills another's magic lab with slave collars (or any other item), then any items that he might have forged that turn get lost. And maybe it wasn't possible to throw away items directly from the magic lab in the past, so you had to put it on some commander to get rid of them - which would be a pain if it were slave collars (gives feeblemind and is cursed, i.e. you need a new commander every time).

[Edi]

lch said:

Messages are sent before item forging occurs, which includes transfer of gems and magic items between nations. If somebody fills another's magic lab with slave collars (or any other item), then any items that he might have forged that turn get lost. And maybe it wasn't possible to throw away items directly from the magic lab in the past, so you had to put it on some commander to get rid of them - which would be a pain if it were slave collars (gives feeblemind and is cursed, i.e. you need a new commander every time).

Has anyone checked what the message limit is? It used to be 20 messages per turn total (so you could not get more than that even if more were sent to you). So far as throwing items away, it has always been there. As long as you go to the lab through F8, you can do it. Most of the time people go through a commander's item slots, in which case it equips the item and does not allow the option to throw away.

[Baalz]

Yes, the point about communions really illustrates my point that I think a lot of people don't really understand what I was getting at. We're playing the game as it is, not the game that was "intended" by the devs, whatever that means. Unintended does not mean broken, lots of times some of the most interesting interactions in games were probably unintended, the devs are not a perfect source of divine wisdom, they're just some cool guys who put together a bunch of stuff they thought would be cool and tweaked it until they felt like they had a fun game. Lots of people have commented they like the communion mechanic as it adds to the strategic depth and generally makes the game more fun. This is exactly how I feel about things like copying Bogus' commands and many other tricks that are arguably clever ways to take advantage of quirks in the game, do not unballance things and generally just add to the wonderful texture of this game. Game hosts should absolutely "ban" whatever they think will make a fun game from specific tactics to diplomacy to forging clams to casting Arcane Nexus. It's a pet peeve of mine that in most games people find the idea of using "exploits" abhorrent....yet basically this often boils down to after the fact trying to make up house rules of what is "intended" for the prefect version of the game.

[Velusion]

Baalz said:
Yes, the point about communions really illustrates my point that I think a lot of people don't really understand what I was getting at. We're playing the game as it is, not the game that was "intended" by the devs, whatever that means. Unintended does not mean broken, lots of times some of the most interesting interactions in games were probably unintended, the devs are not a perfect source of divine wisdom, they're just some cool guys who put together a bunch of stuff they thought would be cool and tweaked it until they felt like they had a fun game. Lots of people have commented they like the communion mechanic as it adds to the strategic depth and generally makes the game more fun. This is exactly how I feel about things like copying Bogus' commands and many other tricks that are arguably clever ways to take advantage of quirks in the game, do not unballance things and generally just add to the wonderful texture of this game. Game hosts should absolutely "ban" whatever they think will make a fun game from specific tactics to diplomacy to forging clams to casting Arcane Nexus. It's a pet peeve of mine that in most games people find the idea of using "exploits" abhorrent....yet basically this often boils down to after the fact trying to make up house rules of what is "intended" for the prefect version of the game.

I pretty much agree with everything your saying.

However, on the flip side, one of my pet peeves are players that say that "anything could go" but then don't really mean it.

Like QM:
"If it is in the game it is fair play!" but then goes on to say: "Well... except for that MoD thingy... that is totally an exploit!"

It's totally hypocritical to say that you think the game should be played as is and then give exceptions.

And yes... those aren't exact quotes - but the impression they give is the same.

[Baalz]

Velusion said:

I pretty much agree with everything your saying.

However, on the flip side, one of my pet peeves are players that say that "anything could go" but then don't really mean it.

Like QM:
"If it is in the game it is fair play!" but then goes on to say: "Well... except for that MoD thingy... that is totally an exploit!"

It's totally hypocritical to say that you think the game should be played as is and then give exceptions.

And yes... those aren't exact quotes - but the impression they give is the same.

I don't think most people who take that position are hypocritical, any more than I think it's hypocritical to host a game and allow some tactics but not others. I think the basis of this is "does this break the game?". We can disagree as to what satisfies that condition, but its a very different discussion than what's an "exploit" in an "unintended" game mechanic. The position to ban the MoD exploit has nothing to do with it being unintended, it has to do with the opinion that it really breaks the game. Heck, most of the MP games I've joined lately have banned Arcane Nexus for the same reason. The difference is MoD is pretty much the only universally frowned on tactic so should probably be assumed to be banned unless something is said.

[quantum_mechani]

Velusion said:
Like QM:
"If it is in the game it is fair play!" but then goes on to say: "Well... except for that MoD thingy... that is totally an exploit!"

It's totally hypocritical to say that you think the game should be played as is and then give exceptions.

And yes... those aren't exact quotes - but the impression they give is the same.

My original quote:

quantum_mechani said:
I've put my two cents in on this before, but in my opinion anything that can be accomplished through the basic game interface and is not specifically outlawed by the host is fair game. That said, a few things are simply so critically buggy hosts should almost always outlaw them, primarily just mist of deception + damage enchantment.

There is a huge difference between saying anytime a player uses a tactic they are being somehow dishonest or cheating, versus recommending that hosts use specific house rules if they want their games to be more fun.

[Hadrian_II]

I think this discussion cant reach a conclusion, as there are innate difference between minmaxers and players that have a more roleplaying perspective.

As on one side sailing out of besieged castles, so the sieger does not notice it, or sending your enemy useless trinkets, so that he stops forging makes perfect sense to minmaxers because they get a benefit from this action, even if it defies common sense and is at best a very cheesy solution. While the rp fraction considers this cheating.

So the only solution is the devs either fixing the bugs, or declare them as features.

[Edratman]

Ich, thank you.

WOW, someone has to be a real turd to do this. They obviously promised to trade forgings of value and then actually sent slave collars. (I forged one, once. Couldn't figure out why such an apparently valueless item was on the list, tried it, and am still wondering.)

I cannot rate this nefarious trick as an exploit. I define an exploit as utilizing some deficiency in the programming that permits something that was totally unintended by the game designers. This slave collar trade is a seperate category.

[thejeff]

No, the slave collar trick has nothing to do with a trade.

You just send them unannounced. Tons of them. Enough to fill his lab and make him throw away anything he forged that turn. Wasting mage time and gems.

The deficiency in programming is twofold, restricted lab space and trades coming before your own forging.