P62, Bish pulled off what Rooks could not

[LYNX]

Originally posted by sullie363
Almost to the day one year ago, the Bish took P62 on the current map and held off numerous attempts made by the Rooks to take it.  The way we held them off was by keeping the CV close allowing LVTs to spawn directly onto land allowing constant resupply.  After hours of constant fighting and resupplying, the situation was ended when a certain high ranked player switched sides from the Rooks to the Bish to move the CV away allowing the Rooks to take the base.  They claimed they tried every single thing they could to take the base and this was the only way to end it.  

Well today, we had the same exact situation except the roles were reversed.  This time the Rooks had P62 and the Bish were trying to take it.  For hours and hours we both fought over the base trying to end the never ending resupply just as the Rooks had over a year ago.  However the key difference is how the situation came to an end.  A few diehard, never say die, Bish drove GVs over a sector to take out the LVTs as they spawned putting an end to the resupply and allowing us to take the base.  I guess the base wasn't impossible to take after all, it just required some determination.  WTG Bish on a fine job.

I remember it well and as a rook was not impressed with rooks action.  As to you bish guys driving about 1.5 hours .... fair play to ya.  Anyone who want to drive that far deserves a reward and in this case a port and cv.

[Grits]

Originally posted by sullie363
Ah yes the switch country tool.  I don't think many people would look highly on players constantly jumping countries to help their original country take bases.  If you're going to switch countries it should be because you've had enough of where you were and are looking for a change, not a quick sabotage to a frustrating solution.

Again this is your opinion, who are you to say why someone switches sides? Switching countries is less dubious than exploiting the LVT spawn bug since it is intentionally part of the game design, while the bug is not.

Any, and I mean ANY[/b], method used to stop exploitation of a bug in the game is by nature justified. Zazen is also correct that if the Bish had a person with high enough rank who could have switched and moved that CV they would have, to suggest otherwise is pure delusion.

[thndregg]

Originally posted by Grits
Again this is your opinion, who are you to say why someone switches sides? Switching countries is less dubious than exploiting the LVT spawn bug since it is intentionally part of the game design, while the bug is not.

Any, and I mean ANY, method used to stop exploitation of a bug in the game is by nature justified. Zazen is also correct that if the Bish had a person with high enough rank who could have switched and moved that CV they would have, to suggest otherwise is pure delusion. [/B]

Did anyone get any tangible proof of any kind that the LVT spawn "bug" is  a bug? Did anyone hear or read any utterance from HTC that this is a bug at all? I would like to hear from the master himself so the speculation and conjecture can cease.

[SlapShot]

Originally posted by thndregg
Do people really have to have the definition of ethics and fairness written down to enjoy ANY game? Last I checked, it was common sense.

Your the one that brought it to the surface ... gameplay ethics ... so I figured that you had some hardcopy that supported your position ... I guess not.

Common sense tells me to dont give a ****e if I die or live ... I get a new friggen airplane every single time I die ... regardless of some sort of pseudo-ethics of pseudo-sense ... It's all about me and how I choose to spend my $14.94/month.

[sullie363]

Originally posted by Grits
Again this is your opinion, who are you to say why someone switches sides? Switching countries is less dubious than exploiting the LVT spawn bug since it is intentionally part of the game design, while the bug is not.

My criticism wasn't so much about why someone switches sides but how they conduct themselves once they switch.  

Any, and I mean ANY[/b], method used to stop exploitation of a bug in the game is by nature justified.

To quote a good friend of mine, "This is your opinion."

---------------------


Still I feel that the point is being missed, sort of wish we had an emoticon for that.  Anyway the point is the justification given for Zazen's irregular tactics was that all conventional means of taking the base had been exhausted.  By conventional I mean anything that can be done within your own country.  Obviously the long task of driving there in tanks was not thought of at the time.  And according to Zazen, even if it had been, the option to simply grab the CV and take it away would still of been used which sort of goes against the concept of trying everything short of switching sides before actually switching sides.  Wonder how long this will last before old Skuzz shuts it down, anybody want to start a pool?

[SlapShot]

Originally posted by LYNX
I remember it well and as a rook was not impressed with rooks action.  As to you bish guys driving about 1.5 hours .... fair play to ya.  Anyone who want to drive that far deserves a reward and in this case a port and cv.

Anyone who want to drive that far deserves a reward and in this case a port and cv ...

nah ... better yet ...

Anyone who want to drive that far deserves a frontal lobotomy.

[Grits]

Originally posted by sullie363
To quote a good friend of mine, "This is your opinion."

Ah, but side switching is part of the game, intentionally put there by the designer, not an unforseen quirk in a map. An integral part of the game was used to stop exploitation of an unintentional one, that is fact not opinion. As I said earlier in this thread, if a Bish would have switched to move the CV I would be defending that just as much as I did Zazen a year ago.

Still I feel that the point is being missed, sort of wish we had an emoticon for that.  Anyway the point is the justification given for Zazen's irregular tactics was that all conventional means of taking the base had been exhausted.  By conventional I mean anything that can be done within your own country.  Obviously the long task of driving there in tanks was not thought of at the time.  And according to Zazen, even if it had been, the option to simply grab the CV and take it away would still of been used which sort of goes against the concept of trying everything short of switching sides before actually switching sides.  Wonder how long this will last before old Skuzz shuts it down, anybody want to start a pool? [/B]

It was thought of, and it was thought to be less efficient than Zazen switching and moving the CV the 300 yds it took to stop the LVT spawn exploit. The Bish did not have the option due to lack of a player outranking the highest Rook and thus had to drive Tigers for two hours, otherwise they would have done the same or do you deny that?

I think this thread has been pretty respectful so far, I dont know why skuzzy would have to lock it. Nothing wrong with arguments as long as they stay civil.

[rshubert]

Originally posted by SlapShot
Your the one that brought it to the surface ... gameplay ethics ... so I figured that you had some hardcopy that supported your position ... I guess not.

Common sense tells me to dont give a ****e if I die or live ... I get a new friggen airplane every single time I die ... regardless of some sort of pseudo-ethics of pseudo-sense ... It's all about me and how I choose to spend my $14.94/month.

Ahhh, now the real story comes out.  We're talking situational ethics.

Situational ethics don't exist, slapshot.  If ethics are variable, they aren't ethics--they're just suggestions.  Ethical individuals act in an ethical manner in all things, not just when it's convenient or fun.

You see, that's part of the problem, my boy.  You live like you play.  If you act dishonorably on the playing field, you will act dishonorably in your day-to-day interactions.

In other words, nobody can trust you.  You would screw them as quickly as you would an opponent in the game.  You have no honor.  Even defending Zazen's position is to throw away your personal honor, and to show that you are ethically challenged.

The game world is a pseudo world, but you aren't a pseudo person, and your interactions with others aren't pseudo interactions.  

Now do you finally get it, or are you so blind that you will not see?

[Grits]

Originally posted by rshubert
In other words, nobody can trust you.  You would screw them as quickly as you would an opponent in the game.  You have no honor.  Even defending Zazen's position is to throw away your personal honor, and to show that you are ethically challenged.

Please enlighten me as too how switching sides to move the CV is less ethical than exploiting a bug. Please convince me that if the Bish had a player online at the time ranked higher than all the Rooks they would not have done the same as Zazen. I would like to hear those arguments.

[Zazen13]

Originally posted by SlapShot
Anyone who want to drive that far deserves a reward and in this case a port and cv ...

nah ... better yet ...

Anyone who wants to drive that far deserves a frontal lobotomy.

That's some funny watermelon right there! Someone needs to nab this gem for sig material....

Zazen

[Zazen13]

Originally posted by rshubert
Ahhh, now the real story comes out.  We're talking situational ethics.

Situational ethics don't exist, slapshot.  If ethics are variable, they aren't ethics--they're just suggestions.  Ethical individuals act in an ethical manner in all things, not just when it's convenient or fun.

 

Wrong!

Ethics by definition is a moral code of conduct  used as a paradigm within the context of the individual's society to guide one's actions in a "given situation". Allow me to illustrate. Most would agree it is un-ethical to take a human life? Correct?

What if you are at war?
What if it is a rape artist attacking your wife or daughter?
What if it's a crack-head with a switch blade at your throat..?

Get it? Ethics is very conditional and situational.

There is no absolute anything. In evaluating any situation an ethical person has to consider the possible outcomes, both from doing nothing and from doing something. The ethically correct choice is invariably the decision which best serves to do the most universal good and/or prevent wrongdoing...In my opinion, I made a decision and chose a course of action which was, under the circumstances, ethical. Would commandeering another country's CV be ethical in other situations where there was no blatant wrongdoing? Almost certainly not, but in this unique situation it was...

By the way I only did so after 4+ hours of waiting for Bish to move the CV and many, many attempts at conventional capture with overwhelming numbers to no avail due to blatant and perpetual exploitation of the re-supply bug.


Zazen

[pluck]

Originally posted by rshubert
Ahhh, now the real story comes out.  We're talking situational ethics.

Situational ethics don't exist, slapshot.  If ethics are variable, they aren't ethics--they're just suggestions.  Ethical individuals act in an ethical manner in all things, not just when it's convenient or fun.

You see, that's part of the problem, my boy.  You live like you play.  If you act dishonorably on the playing field, you will act dishonorably in your day-to-day interactions.

In other words, nobody can trust you.  You would screw them as quickly as you would an opponent in the game.  You have no honor.  Even defending Zazen's position is to throw away your personal honor, and to show that you are ethically challenged.

The game world is a pseudo world, but you aren't a pseudo person, and your interactions with others aren't pseudo interactions.  

Now do you finally get it, or are you so blind that you will not see?

lol, who broke out the weed.  ok, i'll bite.  ethics ARE variable but not suggestions.  Ethics ARE a code of conduct, decided by culter/government/etc.   different cultures will have different ethical beliefs.  trying to equate how somehow plays a computer game vs. how they interact with life is just wierd.

your point does have several flaws though....you can't base your ideas of what is ethical on what someone elses idea's of ethical are.  example, we have a profession (lawyers) which operate under ethics, ethics which say it's okay to get a defendent whom you know is guilty of the hook.  to the profession they are acting ethically, but many would think the are unethical scum.  out of work, they are very trust worthy..... is stem cell research ethical? depends on who you ask.

i might also add the a psuedo world has psuedo characters.  these characters though controlled by real people still live in a psuedo world and are not governed by any code of ethics accept those set forth by the creator of that world (HTC).  therefore, if you aren't infringing on the ethical standards set forth by HTC, then you are indeed acting ethically.   BBS is the messaging extention of the psuedo world.

In conclusion, since the MA and the BBS (by extension) are psuedo worlds populated with fictious inhabitants, they can not be held to the ethics held by real world cultures, as they are only governed by ethics set forth by HTC. lol, how did i do?

ps, i think we are talking about gaming the game right?

[sullie363]

I still challenge the idea that this a bug at all and rather a victim of poor base placement.  If the port was placed on the west side of the island would we still have this problem?  The reason we have this issue is because the CV is almost always west of the port with a good chunk of land between the port and the CV.  The LVTs are spawning at a normal distance from the target base, just they are spawning on land instead of water.  So I would say this is not a bug at all and the system is working perfectly.  Rather it is a case of poor base placement.  Now a real bug would be if the port was on the west side of the base and LVTs spawned to the east on dry land, that would be something worth whining about.  But this of coarse won't be settled until HT comes in here and says one way or the other.

And now I'm off to the beach for three days so have fun looking up ethics in the dictionary.

[Grits]

Originally posted by sullie363
I still challenge the idea that this a bug at all and rather a victim of poor base placement.

Its not a bug in the game proper, its a map bug.

[kj714]

It seems to me that if you want to find it reasonable that a player can switch sides to work AGAINST his new country, then you also have to say it's acceptable for any reason.  So if you are going to support the moving of the CV to defeat a "bug" in the map, then support all manner of side jumping and manipulation for any reason.

It's a game and not all situations can be covered by "the rulz". Maybe it's a "bug" in the game that people can get away with doing this.

Anarchy rules!!!!!