| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Words are wind, the only true measure of a person is what they actually do when they come into power. You can trust someone until you can't, fairly straightforward.
But even when you get to trust people that is when the betrayal becomes worst. I planted for example spies in every major group in this game when we were considering joining. Those spies despite reporting back to me had the main job of being extremely helpful to their hosts. They would of continued being good members on the surface while rising through the ranks until the right time to activate them and bring down the group they were embedded in came.
All academic now as we are not joining the game but we planned well ahead and aimed to infiltrate people wherever we could almost a year in advance of alpha
Goblin Squad Member
|
Well then he should actually provide some evidence to back up his inflammatory statements, like suggesting that we might be griefers. Something, I will add, that he has been trying to push onto Golgotha since before the Alpha.
When a settlement does very little but accuse my people of being cheaters (Nihimon) and griefers (Decius), it is rather difficult to take them seriously.
"Very little"?
I'm sorry, I forgot who I was speaking to. I'll trying being a little bit plainer, shall I?
When one groups only political message is "Griefers! Cheaters! Psychopaths!", they are rather difficult to take seriously.
Next time I'll use smaller words.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
And that's fine. PvP will probably become relevant in such tiny baby steps that experience won't matter, and throwing a bunch of inexperienced people onto the field (with empty pockets so they can't lose anything and with free gear given to them and gear replacement promises) will probably accomplish everything that needs to be accomplished by most settlements.
From what I have read, 3-4 characters with minimal experience are meant to be capable to kill a player with more experience and better gear.
Experienced characters aren't meant to kill less experienced characters like they were desperate goblins.So, yes, "throwing a bunch of inexperienced people onto the field" will and is meant to "accomplish everything that needs to be accomplished by most settlements".
Yeah, pretty much. It's too bad that Goblin Works and Paizo blew their marketing wad on a bunch of people who apparently fell into that category. I guess the rest of the evaporation of the playbase can be accounted for by the bugginess of each update.
Ah, the classical "the game isn't as I want it, so it i failing" argument. You have numbers supporting that "evaporating player base" statement?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
My point is it's irrelevant from the 'infiltrated' group's point of view. Your lying on the internet, not exactly a difficult task, it's nothing special, people do it all the time. There is no way to distinguish between a spy and actual legit player, if the spy was detectable they're a really bad spy. But since there is no real risk it's kinda irrelevant, either they get to a point where they can betray you or they don't.
So you have two options, delegate and break it up enough that hopefully no one person can sink you (tho a really organized team could still get you) or delegate nothing and keep a firm enough grip that the worse they're gonna do is spill some info. Practicality of either depends entirely on the mechanics of the game. But if you get all excited over it ya done got issues, your not doing much except lying, whoopee.
This spy bragging was boring back in EVE, and I wasn't even part of the big alliance stuff.
From what I have read, 3-4 characters with minimal experience are meant to be capable to kill a player with more experience and better gear.
They probably won't have to be capable of killing anyone, it looks like the point counting thing is going to stay with us for a while.
The ability to find the tower/holding/outpost is likely all that is required by the zerg.
My point is it's irrelevant from the 'infiltrated' group's point of view. Your lying on the internet, not exactly a difficult task, it's nothing special, people do it all the time. There is no way to distinguish between a spy and actual legit player, if the spy was detectable they're a really bad spy. But since there is no real risk it's kinda irrelevant, either they get to a point where they can betray you or they don't.
So you have two options, delegate and break it up enough that hopefully no one person can sink you (tho a really organized team could still get you) or delegate nothing and keep a firm enough grip that the worse they're gonna do is spill some info. Practicality of either depends entirely on the mechanics of the game. But if you get all excited over it ya done got issues, your not doing much except lying, whoopee.
This spy bragging was boring back in EVE, and I wasn't even part of the big alliance stuff.
you assume a spy is just there to betray you though often a spies job is a lot more subtle it is for example to stir the pot between two opposing forces which you feel you wish to disrupt for example ( and I have cleared it with him) we had a spy reasonably high in the pax pfo leadership that spent much time subtly stirring the pot between pax and teo by making teo think pax was spying on them.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sure, whatever, the spy is doing something spyish, pick your favorite activity. The point still stands the victim can only tell the difference if the spy is godawful at it and theirs only a few basic things they can do to slow it down. Most of which boils down to keeping sensitive things need to know and not relying on individuals too much. Still ain't foolproof, still easy as all hell to do.
Sure, whatever, the spy is doing something spyish, pick your favorite activity. The point still stands the victim can only tell the difference if the spy is godawful at it and theirs only a few basic things they can do to slow it down. Most of which boils down to keeping sensitive things need to know and not relying on individuals too much. Still ain't foolproof.
Not much point when the spy is appointed to security chief :)
As I have been outed(with my permission) sorry Pax guys you are a great bunch and it wasn't personal
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Offers to fight on even terms have so far been turned down.Is that surprising?
And so, why you are surprised is someone don't want to play the pinata?
Your posts imply that is only logic for a bandit to try to avoid having a even or worse chance to lose (BTW, I agree), then you appear surprised when your targets say that they have a diastase for being forced to fight at disadvantageous odds.
It is exactly the same logic that you are applying, so I don't see why you are surprised or annoyed if other people apply your logic against you.
I would add that it was only pfo I was spying for all the other games I played with Pax (and enjoyed as I said you are a great bunch of people) I played straight
he was one of the strongest advocates for not joining the game unfortunately he acceded to being outed to show the level of metagaming that people are going to go to...at least those that come from an Eve background.
Well, if the game ever gets to the point where the game is more acceptable to your crowd, the offer will stand.
We will bear that in mind I hope the game works out I really do. I just think it is not something I can sell currently
What Tink said.
Sorry Areks just the way things work I have been Steelwings 2Ic for more years than I care to count and he needed people to come in and be in place in case we joined
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Tink,
You did not explicitly tell me anything like that, I made it abundantly clear that we would protect EBA territory. Perhaps, there was some miscommunication there, but I walked away understanding the above.
EDIT: After reading your edit, yea, there definitely was some miscommunication. Next time we make an agreement it will have to be in writing, as to be clear, concise, and no confusion.
You made a verbal agreement with a LE settlement and expected for the words to mean the same thing for you and them?
just got another ping from Pagan charlie...he is madly trying to reply to you but Paizo keeps timing out on him
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Tink,
You did not explicitly tell me anything like that, I made it abundantly clear that we would protect EBA territory. Perhaps, there was some miscommunication there, but I walked away understanding the above.
EDIT: After reading your edit, yea, there definitely was some miscommunication. Next time we make an agreement it will have to be in writing, as to be clear, concise, and no confusion.
You made a verbal agreement with a LE settlement and expected for the words to mean the same thing for you and them?
Eh. It had nothing to do with our alignment. It was a misunderstanding, one that has been addressed in private.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Good play Pagan and Steelwing. You stepped down well before the game monetized but the TEO spy angle worked perfectly. My inbox was blowing up with accusations, almost all pointed at Areks.
Charlie I enjoyed my time in Pax thanks to all of you and I enjoyed immensely all the games I played with you all such as lotro, tsw and I even hope I helped you all enjoy Eve though that was a problem not to appear to know to much:)
I am sorry I afflicted your inbox on you but at the time I was just doing the job I was here to do. Hopefully you will forgive that as there was no animosity behind it merely playing the meta game.
The reason I agreed to be outed was not to embarrass Pax but because while I no longer feel this is a game for me I would like it to succeed and I wanted to illustrate the lengths people will actually go to for success. The community should look at it as a wakeup call. If the game is successful people will come that will play the metagame just as fast and hard as we have if not more. Especially when you consider we did this not even being sure we would end up playing
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Offers to fight on even terms have so far been turned down.Is that surprising?
And so, why you are surprised is someone don't want to play the pinata?
Your posts imply that is only logic for a bandit to try to avoid having a even or worse chance to lose (BTW, I agree), then you appear surprised when your targets say that they have a diastase for being forced to fight at disadvantageous odds.
It is exactly the same logic that you are applying, so I don't see why you are surprised or annoyed if other people apply your logic against you.
I never said anyone "wants" to play the pinata, but they should expect to be one if they are not careful and accept that fact and move on.
If the infrequent ganking brings you to the brink of quitting, then this game may not be for you (not you personally Diego).
I would like to see a poll run (unscientific of course, and self reporting) of self proclaimed "PVP Adverse" (no names) and have them answer the following question.
How many times have you been killed while gathering in a non pvp enabled hex since the launch of EE?
0 times
1 - 2 times
3 - 4 times
5 times or more
I think that if the 5 or more has any significant number, the poll is tainted by those with an agenda.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
What Tink said.Sorry Areks just the way things work I have been Steelwings 2Ic for more years than I care to count and he needed people to come in and be in place in case we joined
To be perfectly honest, Krow and I had conversations about you. There was no evidence to back up our intuition of course, but there were two instances where we both got the same gut feeling. We were content to let things play out and well they have.
Neither you nor I are in the game, but regardless I consider you a friend. Whether or not I trust you as far as I can throw you is another story =)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Good play Pagan and Steelwing. You stepped down well before the game monetized but the TEO spy angle worked perfectly. My inbox was blowing up with accusations, almost all pointed at Areks.Charlie I enjoyed my time in Pax thanks to all of you and I enjoyed immensely all the games I played with you all such as lotro, tsw and I even hope I helped you all enjoy Eve though that was a problem not to appear to know to much:)
I am sorry I afflicted your inbox on you but at the time I was just doing the job I was here to do. Hopefully you will forgive that as there was no animosity behind it merely playing the meta game.
The reason I agreed to be outed was not to embarrass Pax but because while I no longer feel this is a game for me I would like it to succeed and I wanted to illustrate the lengths people will actually go to for success. The community should look at it as a wakeup call. If the game is successful people will come that will play the metagame just as fast and hard as we have if not more. Especially when you consider we did this not even being sure we would end up playing
Like I said, it was a good play. I can't blame you for doing your job well. It certainly wasn't the only lesson needed to learn, and it certainly won't be the last.
I was actually pretty impressed
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Offers to fight on even terms have so far been turned down.Is that surprising?
And so, why you are surprised is someone don't want to play the pinata?
Your posts imply that is only logic for a bandit to try to avoid having a even or worse chance to lose (BTW, I agree), then you appear surprised when your targets say that they have a diastase for being forced to fight at disadvantageous odds.
It is exactly the same logic that you are applying, so I don't see why you are surprised or annoyed if other people apply your logic against you.I never said anyone "wants" to play the pinata, but they should expect to be one if they are not careful and accept that fact and move on.
If the infrequent ganking brings you to the brink of quitting, then this game may not be for you (not you personally Diego).
I would like to see a poll run (unscientific of course, and self reporting) of self proclaimed "PVP Adverse" (no names) and have them answer the following question.
How many times have you been killed while gathering in a non pvp enabled hex since the launch of EE?
0 times
1 - 2 times
3 - 4 times
5 times or moreI think that if the 5 or more has any significant number, the poll is tainted by those with an agenda.
You see, the problem is that most of the posts of yours that I have read have a tone of reproach against the people that don't like to be the pinata, as you had a right to get as much piantas as you want.
That kind of extreme tone will generate the same kind of extreme replies that make you so angry.You are fueling the posts that keep you angry.
What Tink said.Sorry Areks just the way things work I have been Steelwings 2Ic for more years than I care to count and he needed people to come in and be in place in case we joinedTo be perfectly honest, Krow and I had conversations about you. There was no evidence to back up our intuition of course, but there were two instances where we both got the same gut feeling. We were content to let things play out and well they have.
Neither you nor I are in the game, but regardless I consider you a friend. Whether or not I trust you as far as I can throw you is another story =)
At the end of the day these are video games. I would like to think we can step outside the game and have friends even if we aren't what we seem in game. I liked people in Pax as people. They are a great bunch. What happens in game is purely in game :)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
That kind of extreme tone will generate the same kind of extreme replies that make you so angry.You are fueling the posts that keep you angry.
Your perception of my anger is incorrect. I very rarely get angry, more often I'm amused by the back-and-forth. It is actually more fun than the game in most instances and I have more access to the forums than to the game anyway.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
So Tink/Phyllain, placing a small holding and T2 farming an area where it was posted to do so is hostile is okay, but taking ONE tower to make sure said holding is removed and then relinquishing the tower is not?
We did not agree to your laws. You did agree to the tower agreement.
You didn't relinquish control of the tower, we took it back from you.
The two are not equivalent.
Had we taken one of your towers, an equivalent reaction would be to take one or more of ours.
Do you see the difference?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
We did not agree to your laws. You did agree to the tower agreement.
We agreed to not taking CORE 6 towers. That was not a core 6 tower as those were removed from the game. So we did in fact keep to that core 6 tower agreement.
You didn't relinquish control of the tower, we took it back from you.
The two are not equivalent.
Posturing, internets, meh...
Had we taken one of your towers, an equivalent reaction would be to take one or more of ours.
Do you see the difference?
So you're saying you don't have to agree to our "laws" (which is fine) but we have to agree to your method/means of correcting an attack against our sovereignty by you?
So we should have put down our own holding next to Golgotha OR asked real nicely for GOL leadership to have it removed?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
We are talking about a different tower agreement not the original NAP.
You are correct
Asking us to remove it would have been a nice place to start yes. We might not have agreed but it would have been nice.
See, and there in lies the issue. "We might not have agreed". Your purview, sure, but clearly we (Phaeros) understood that since you condoned the action in the first place, it was highly likely if we didn't take that action you wouldn't have.
Especially since you knew we didn't want it there in the first place.
We wanted it gone, placing one in your lands and/or asking you to remove it did not seem like very options that would get the result we desired. A tower for a day or two did.
I'm curious, though, that in reply you chose "kill them all" as opposed to asking us to lay off the tower taking or otherwise engaging us (Phaeros) in dialogue.
Both were hostile actions. It's not a matter of what Tink said with regard to you (GOL) agreeing to our laws so much as knowing they exist and knowing if you do x action how it will be perceived and what the possible responses are. On our (Phaeros) side, we agreed to our EBA partners to chill out with respect to the fight with you guys, but we did not agree to the "on paper" armistice.
Part of that reasoning for not agreeing to the on paper was shown in that your AGC company did something that representatives from ALL EBA settlements considered hostile after the armistice was done.
I'm not pointing fingers or trying to gotcha. Just illustrating a point of view.
Take it for what you will.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I thought that went without saying, and I am surprised this thread has lasted this long. It is amusing to see how easily things can escalate.
Until things improve on the diplomatic side, with the leaders discussing in earnest and hammering out issues, this will continue to happen.
Perhaps this is what most want after all and we are seeing the fruits of that desire now.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
You could have asked AGC to remove it, Golgotha had nothing to do with its placement. I saw no distinction between having that there or just banking up a hex away.
The building aside, there is still the matter of AGC farming that hex and that action itself being considered a hostile action in addition to blatantly thumbing your nose (absolutely your choice) at our requests to not farm T2s in our area.
Especially when there were T2s in other hexes elsewhere. Additionally, if you want to separate yourself from Golgotha (and Phaeros from the EBA), AGC has built up a pretty good share of bad credit and we consider the fighting merchants hostile anywhere on the map.
Will that change...only your actions can decide that. I can say that farming in our alliances area after alliance representation has asked non members not to doesn't help.
It is what it is from our view.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I thought that went without saying, and I am surprised this thread has lasted this long. It is amusing to see how easily things can escalate.
Until things improve on the diplomatic side, with the leaders discussing in earnest and hammering out issues, this will continue to happen.
Perhaps this is what most want after all and we are seeing the fruits of that desire now.
Along with clear, and loud communication down the chain to all members of all groups.
Agreements should also have representatives (leadership) from all parties involved from any two groups when in negotiations.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
bad credit? Can I cash that in somewhere......
AGC is widely misunderstood, but it's okay. Someday the rest of the world will catch up to us.
It's not a matter of distancing ourselves from Golgotha, I will gladly let the big boys handle their own.
But the earlier argument had revolved around the base camp, now, I view it, this has been discussed for what it is, and now the action itself of farming in "proclaimed" EBA territory can rightfully be discussed.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If I claim a public sidewalk is my territory and I will kill anyone who walks on it, and then proceed to make good my threat, I can absolutely make a case that my actions were foreseeable. Arguing that they were justified is a very different problem.
If I claim that my motivation is to protect PVP-averse players from unwanted combat, and then also have a policy under which I will initiate wars in response to peaceful PVE activity, I'm in much the same moral position as the sidewalk killer. Just because I announced the policy does not mean that my actions under the policy are justified, especially when the policy is so obviously incompatible with my "defense of innocents" posturing.
People who truly want to protect their innocents would not set policies under which their first response to a completely non-violent territoriality problem is a shooting war.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If I claim a public sidewalk is my territory and I will kill anyone who walks on it, and then proceed to make good my threat, I can absolutely make a case that my actions were foreseeable. Arguing that they were justified is a very different problem.
If I claim that my motivation is to protect PVP-averse players from unwanted combat, and then also have a policy under which I will initiate wars in response to peaceful PVE activity, I'm in much the same moral position as the sidewalk killer. Just because I announced the policy does not mean that my actions under the policy are justified, especially when the policy is so obviously incompatible with my "defense of innocents" posturing.
People who truly want to protect their innocents would not set policies under which their first response to a completely non-violent territoriality problem is a shooting war.
Well, Guurzak, and it comes from you being on the outside, but (Phaeros') policy, which may shock you but doesn't make it any less true, is not shoot first unless you've earned that special place in our hearts.
We attacked AGC and took and AGC tower. Not attacked GOL and took a GOL tower. There were GOL towers we could have taken, but we took an AGC one.
Additionally, protecting our innocents...something I'm truly tired of hearing as it's part of that whole propaganda to paint us all as avoiders of PvP or that we aren't good at PvP...does not mutually exclude declaring/taking/holding territory (in a game based on it even if the mechanics aren't fully in) nor setting guidelines for those who wish to enter said territory.
There's this perception that some or all in the SE have to be defensive and can never proactively stand up against a wrong or a perceived test against our sovereignty. Of the entire map...our area was chosen. If we didn't respond with action then the days news reels would be all about how the EBA doesn't attempt to defend their claim, yadda, yadda.
And as Phyllain said, asking you to remove it was only a 50/50 proposition, if that.
If good faith is shown and communication consistent, much of the misinformation floating around here would clear up.