Dueling Ethics ~ Please all give your opinions

todarling

Violette LeDrunc I agree with what you are saying, but when them power duelers get to the top and have to take on a real dueler or a real dueler hits them they will lose and start dropping back.
 

Hellstromm

So, your argument is: because people can get easy xp via fixed duels, which increases their level at an accelerated rate, they eventually reach so high a level that they can no longer duel anyone, and therefore the system works?

Amazing logic...
 

Violette LeDrunc

Violette LeDrunc I agree with what you are saying, but when them power duelers get to the top and have to take on a real dueler or a real dueler hits them they will lose and start dropping back.
But if they didn't have to take on real duellers to get there (because of collusion with other players) why would they need to take on real duellers to stay there?

Will they get attacked occasionally by real duellers and lose? Sure. But they can continue colluding for just as long as everybody else continues duelling.
 

todarling

If stats are that important to them to be in the number 1 spot I feel sorry for them and they need to get a life. But that doesn't mean that the devs need to try and change or fix the game to stop it because people like that will always find away to get around the rules.
 

iggyberto

That's what I said earlier. But I do think cheating should be discouraged. I like this game because there is so much more to it than dueling.
 

Mekolp

If stats are that important to them to be in the number 1 spot I feel sorry for them and they need to get a life. But that doesn't mean that the devs need to try and change or fix the game to stop it because people like that will always find away to get around the rules.
At least that will be 1 step, if they keep doing it, then they are taking risks, at least. If they just find something else, well good for them, I can't think of any other way to make good xp than dueling and doing jobs.
 

Violette LeDrunc

If stats are that important to them to be in the number 1 spot I feel sorry for them and they need to get a life. But that doesn't mean that the devs need to try and change or fix the game to stop it because people like that will always find away to get around the rules.
Firstly, there are many different ways to play this game, and players set various goals for themselves. There is nothing wrong with any of them, including liking to move up the rankings. This thread, as has already been pointed out, contains quite a few posters who are at the top of the rankings so this is not a question of sore losers and wannabes. It is simply the fact that the rankings are false.

It has also already been pointed out that saying there should not be a rule because people will cheat anyway isn't a very logical or convincing argument for most people. Should there be no laws against theft because some people steal? Of course not. The fact that some people steal is the reason there are laws against theft.

It seems like you mind is made up, and if that is your judgement then that's fine, but the reasons you have given so far don't add up for me.
 

Tame Bill Hickok

If stats are that important to them to be in the number 1 spot I feel sorry for them and they need to get a life.
I legitimately had the number 1 spot on one world. It's nice to have to the bragging rights and recognition. I think the serious duelers will know who got their points "the right way." But it would be nicer to be recognized by everyone.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Artemis Gordon

If stats are that important to them to be in the number 1 spot I feel sorry for them and they need to get a life. But that doesn't mean that the devs need to try and change or fix the game to stop it because people like that will always find away to get around the rules.
I have to agree that this doesn't make much sense to me either. Even when security cameras are used, some people will shoplift, but does that mean that we should just allow theft and feel sorry for those who feel the need to steal?
 

iggyberto

Ok, recap thus far: Firstly, I do not participate in this action. I have only been playing devils advocate. With that said here is where I see the discussion:

This thread is on the ethics of fixing a fight.
I would say that pretty much everyone agrees that this is Unethical.
I have seen reasons for both sides but none any more valid than the next.
To say it is unfair is not true because with no rule against it that means anyone can do it, premium or no premium. It is an ethical question at this point which is why this thread was started.
To say no rule should be made because someone else would find another way is equally invalid however true it may be. (meaning yes, there will be other ways found and yes they will be equally unethical) See security camera analogy in above post.
My questions regarding the issue somehow do not rate, I guess, but I feel they bring up interesting points on the subject. When a rule is made regarding this issue what will the full implications be? Right now this game is fairly wide open. Because of that you can create new facets of the game. If by making a rule against fixed fights is enacted is it possible that the rule would be vague enough to hamper any further development of in game play that might be enacted by a town, ie a fight night or some other planned event that has not even been thought of yet? With a new rule could innocent people get in trouble (at least until they prove themselves innocent) because of how they play the game? Would it be something like anyone who attacks an unarmed player is automatically flagged? If your town goes to war with another town and there is dueling every day would you be flagged? I know everyone says it is easily detectable but is it easily fooled? Would just one person pointing a finger for malicious reasons get your account frozen?
I am sorry if my what if's bother you but that is how I brainstorm. I am all for the ethical weeding out of fixed fights so long as the offenders are the ONLY ones prosecuted.
 

todarling

The fixed fight issue is the least of the games problems. The devs need to work on fixing the game so it will run smooth in all browsers and stop saying to use this or that browser. As the poster above me just said the ones doing fixed fights are not breaking any rules. There is no rule against it.

Unfortunately people will always look to break or do an end run around the rules get over it. Now this thread needs to be locked up because not everyone will agree and even if everyone said yes fix it there is no right way to fix it. They need to stop the multiple accounts, now there is a problem that needs fixing. The only game I know of that you can play and no rules get broken unless you break them is solitare.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Moonsc

There's been some discussion about the ethics and legality of certain types of dueling. So I thought I'd highlight some instances and let people sound off on whether they think they should be allowed or disallowed. Here goes:

1: Player A has been attacked and is down to 20 health. He visits Player B's town and unequips his weapon and knocks himself out to get 48 hours of time without being dueled.
No reasoned to Unequip you weapon clearly wrong.

2. Player A has been attacked and is down to 20 health. He visits Player B's town and keeps his weapon, but is knocked out, as he had planned, to get 48 hours of time without being dueled.
Very hared to proth this. As I dueler I often put duel back to back and don't look in till there both done.

3. Player A and Player B agree to a duel. Neither party knows the other's stance, and both have their highest-powered weapons and fighting gear equipped.
sometime if you a duel and in a small town you need someone to come along in duel you because you can't yet duel yourself. As long as there both around the same level there for both have a change at win see nothing wrong with it.

4. Does your answer change if the players are in allied towns?
If there are allied town then change are the duel rank would stop them for dueling from anyone ells.

5. Same scenario, but now both unequip their weapons. So it's hand-to-hand combat. Legal or illegal?
It a good way to stead a fit about who go the best skills. 6. the same.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Hellstromm

I'm not all that interested in whether it is ethical or unethical. This is a game, so who cares about ethics? I'm more along the lines of thinking it is going against the spirit of the game. It is an exploitation of a flaw in the game's design which, as I said before, is just as inappropriate as exploitation of a scripted bug.

Yes, everyone can exploit the bug, everyone can exploit the flaw, but the developers did not intend for the game to be played in that fashion. When exploited, this particular design flaw provides such a disparate effect, jobs pale in comparison.

There's also a misunderstanding on the effects of these fixed duels: People who perform these fixed duels likely have almost as many losses as wins. They are taking turns with others, using each other as stepping stones. They gain xp together --- one, then the other, then the other. These exploiters will always have each other to duel, because they'll be leveling together. So, the notion of an eventual cap-off for lack of opponents, is wrong.
 

Artemis Gordon

I agree with that. If the defender is always set up to win, then motivation doesn't enter into it at all. They can just switch off after resting and healing, and regain their motivation while the other person challenges and loses. That way they can get a lot more winning duels in than those who do it the normal way.
 

Hellstromm

As to the issue of innocents getting caught in the crossfire, that will happen. People sharing the same IP are constantly being called out, and banned, on the accusation of multiple accounts. Hard to prove, one way or another. Same will be on the issue of fixed duels.

The innocent will always have the option to contest, as is the case with accusations of multiple accounts. These sorts of rules are not so much geared to penalize people, as they are differentiating between right and wrong. If you say something is against the rules, the blatant and the stupid will be banned. But, more importantly, the player base will know that such actions are no longer acceptable. It is known as deterence.

I used to install alarm systems, 2000 years ago. Household alarm systems are designed to provide the residents a sense of security. But, these alarm systems don't deter break-ins. It is the signs on the lawn and the stickers on the windows, the neighborhood watch plaques at every corner, and the volunteer patrols. It is the potential for consequence that deters. Bring the community on board, and less laws will be broken in your neighborhood.

But, the laws must first exist, or there is no potential for deterence.
 

MadAlice

This thread reminds me of my 'gang' threads back in september

Where I mentioned how I was creating a 'family' and people jumped down my throat telling me it would never work and people would hate me for it.

Six months later and every town and their brother has a family expansion or five.


ANYWAY


The whole subject of having people in allied towns duel each other, with the express purposes of power leveling specific people in the alliance, was brought up waaaay back in October.

First we started doing it to help power level people, and organized a system where different people would be 'voted' on who got to be power leveled by people in the towns, and created a system on how duelers in allied towns could duel each other for competition purposes.


Well within 1 week of it... the whole thing became totally outlawed in the empire and in the US Union. It became considered cheesy.

The safe and fair way is to just play the game the way it was intended. Allies don't attack each other.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

pi-man

I remember people saying allied towns would never work
With forts it's going to have to work even more
 

kroesus

I like how people say there is no specific rule against it so it is OK. When the hotel bug was found there was no rule that said you could not do that. The resolution to that was people had their characters banned. If you have a conscious you know right from wrong even when it isn't technically illegal. We all know power leveling is wrong, well those of us with a conscious anyway.

When a group are enhancing their xp by doing this practice, not only do they continue to have a decent source to level, the amount of xp gained increases with their opponents dueling level. A new twist on this practice, which several used in W9, was to gain xp and money from those better able to do the money jobs. The duelers are then a higher level with better stats and equipment than their legitimate opponents.
 

lockman

IMO, which isn't much. I think you should have to opt into a PK or dueling real people option, like in most MUD's. A lot of people just want to work and build their character/town and not fight, as in the real world...I like the whole idea of a good/bad meter to allow you to work towards good or evil..If their were non-player bots to duel one could make a choice not to duel good bots and only do duel evil ones.
But what will happen in an archaic playing field with no law or retribution for killing or dueling good citizen is all the people who enjoy character building, building towns and questing will eventually lose interest in the game and leave. And you will have no one to build towns..Just my opinion...