Remove SP from UN games, and games in their likeness.
Beiträge: 67
Besucht von: 95 users
Originalbeitrag
Verfasst von Dr Lecter, 25.08.2013 - 04:44
http://atwar-game.com/forum/topic.php?topic_id=9617
Let us first understand what a UN is here. UN is any roleplaying game that centers around one a moderating the actions of other countries and their interactions with one another or the union itself. Typically, the United Nations is emulated in a "UN" game. The rules and regulations in UN don't matter or affect the definition. So long as a union is INTENDED or IMPLIED, it is still a UN.
Now onto the rest.
UN is without a doubt a real problem for Atwar. Let's first make sure this is well established among us.
First and foremost, UN is a massive SP farming scenario
. If you play it and you disallow for the killing of players a UN can, in theory, continue on forever. This is because you can have a series of border wars and then pause before a victor is decided. Next, there is simply the killing of a single entity. In a lot of UNs there tends to be several entities ganging up on 1. In most of these, the intended union designed to moderate actions is either absent, abstained, or generally doesn't care for any moderation of any sort. At times it may even be the intended union at odds against the world. This allows for any player to participate in war against 1 very weak entity. No one is going to win a war against the world. Secondly, UN is very unbalanced. If it weren't bad enough, the same roleplaying game that corrodes our players is also unbalanced. One large country that did literally nothing to get large can destroy all the small countries that did nothing to deserve being defeated. So suppose you're Mexico, and USA decides "hey, forget the rules" and then invades you
. You're mexico against USA. That really wasn't a foreseeable event- and you're at a total disadvantage. This and more are an ongoing problem in UNs, again as if UNs themselves weren't a problem now we've got to worry about what goes on IN UN.Thirdly, UN isn't conducive to strategic play. As mentioned in 1 and 2, you can practically sit there for most of the game on a wad of cash while your allies do all the fighting
. Then when you've got enough money you go invade the person who is trying to recover from fighting 2 of your very powerful fat-cat allies. You'll get tons of SP that you didn't work for. This means, the player in question gained no understanding of strategy. They just know how to pop in when their allies threw enough units to critically wound the opponent.Fourthly, UN is snuffing out other games. So on top of ruining players, it's ruining damn games. Presently, we can't host a good world game anymore. All anybody wants to play is UN
(for the cheap SP gains and sitting there doing nothing). Even 3v3s, 6 player games, are a challenge to create. Even if a game host wanted to include low ranks in 3v3s so they could learn from high ranks, all of those low ranks are out playing UN (for the cheap SP gains and sitting there doing nothing). This leaves game hosts unable to host games. Here is testament from Tunder3: Geschrieben von Tundy, 24.08.2013 at 20:07
i give up hosting scenarios and making maps along time ago, each time i make one super map people never play it cuz UN gets all the players, and when i get to get it full is ruined within 5 turns by a wf or leaver.
That is testimony. This is affecting players everywhere.
Fifthly, AW will rot as a result of the above. Game hosts and good players will quit. Only the foulest most disgusting traits of the community will survive (much like simplistic life forms will survive a nuclear winter but not being squished by my thumb). Eventually, AW will collapse because these UN players simply won't be able to play UN anymore. They'll become high ranked and try to experience other forms of the game and won't know how to excel in them. Once then, bored and not needing SP of the UN, they will quit AW and thus the generation of UN will seal the fate of AW.
Now, these arguments are generally solid. The fifth one is up to interpretation of course
However, it should be well established by now: UN is indeed a real problem for AW. Being in denial is absolutely ridiculous unless you can prove all my points wrong.
So, on to the suggestion:
As a solution to the UN problem, it's been suggested that SP be removed from UN games and games in their likeness (UNs as defined earlier). At first, this may sound far gone. I mean we're really going to remove SP because a bunch of people want to play a popular game?
Considering all of the above arguments and the potential death of AW, I'd say it's at least worth looking into. Removing SP from UN is like removing venom from a snake. Now, one very powerful argument against the fight to stop UNs is that UN is fUN (;D) for the people who play them. Removing SP from UN will effectively prove just how many people actually play it for fun and not for SP
. Next, SP removal means that UN players will be forced to play other games and experience other battles not like those of UN in order to achieve their precious ranks. So, the second concept works whether or not people still play UN after an SP removal. If SP is removed and nobody plays UN ever again, they will be forced to play other more sensible games (assuming they don't want to play UN for fun hehe 
) OOR if they do still play UN, they won't be at rank 8 playing like rank 5.This suggestion is probably the most straight forward by far and it is the second most barbaric method at attacking UN- due the fact that removing UNs altogether ranks above removing SP gain.
Please voice your thoughts on this, and please don't attack me individually. I like the IDEA of UN, it's all fun and games until the community has to suffer
Also, don't use the logic of "don't attack UN games because people like it". UN is by far the only game that actually harms the site as a whole
Bane Konto gelöscht |
|
yes you play europe+ maps and leave the game on turn 1 or 2 and ruin the game for everyone. what happens next? you open a UN game and spam global for 20 minutes with "join un". as for the idea in the post I support it.
Lade...
Lade...
|
|
|
@Mr_Own: No. Only UN games as defined early in the text.
---- "Do not pray for an easy life, pray for the strength to endure a difficult one"
Lade...
Lade...
|
|
First of all, the issue is that people like it, but sometimes you have to do things that people don't like for the greater good. UN games are taking away the basic skills of players and causes decent people to leave. Then when we do play actual games, it suppresses skill because they allyfag thinking it is okay because of UN. Also, just because people swear doesn't mean they are just turning 10. Lastly, scenarios are good if they are like WWII (Which I suck it) where you really need skill. UN games don't take skill.
----  
Lade...
Lade...
|
|
UN is killing WWII, now we have ranks 6 that don't know how to wall. 
Lade...
Lade...
|
|
|
It's obvious what side carries more weight. It is clear that UNs are damaging the community. I don't care about peoples "oh we can play whatever we want". Fuck that. This community is going to die and nobody cares because "oh well they can play whatever they want". They won't have anything left to play if this all continues. AW would collapse eventually if UNs continue. Remove the SP. We can once and for all prove that UN players are there out of SP greed and nothing else. If UNs are really something they do like to play then they will keep playing it, but there's not a chance in hell we can allow these people to farm SP from UN games. Remove SP. That's all we need and perhaps we'll have the ability to combat the UN Problem.
---- "Do not pray for an easy life, pray for the strength to endure a difficult one"
Lade...
Lade...
|
|
|
Yes remove SP from UN. It should be classified as a roleplay scenario, not a competitive one. I am all for people having fun doing whatever they want but UN players should be rewarded for their games.
Lade...
Lade...
|
|
|
This will not happen due to the fact that there is an other side of this argument. Yep, That is UN fanboys. Changes usually happens when most people of atWar agreed with it in forum. This thread is not one of them. Even though most threads with ideas that have most people agreed with it, did not happen. The chance of this happening is rare.
Lade...
Lade...
|
|
|
If we can gather enough evidence that UN is damaging the community, we won't need the majority vote to get AtWar to remove the SP from UN games.
Lade...
Lade...
|
|
|
Lade...
Lade...
|
|
|
Lade...
Lade...
|
|
|
Lade...
Lade...
|
|
|
What ruin games are pricks like who wants to tell people what they can play and what they cant play or whats fun and whats not fun
---- 
Lade...
Lade...
|
|
|
No. This thread is elitism, plain and simple. It's not even subtle, cool elitism. UN games are popular because they give people what they want, fun. To remove SP gains to test that is fucking stupid. If we are to do that, lets remove SP from all games. Farming is the only real argument OP has and that is irrelevant at best. In world games, people can do the same thing in an arguably easier fashion since there is no moderating body to regulate activities. If you believe UN games are taking up too much room, why not have it so there is a UN game always up, instead of allowing people to create more. Or have some limit to how many can be allowed. Or, give UN games there own room. Main/Noob/UN. But don't hate on a scenario just because you don't enjoy it as much as others.
---- Our Mahdi will have a broad forehead and a prominent nose. He will fill the earth with justice as it is filled with injustice and tyranny.
Lade...
Lade...
|
|
your point of view is biased, of course you don't want sp removed, it will take you down to level 7. 
Lade...
Lade...
|
|
|
Oh yes, my bias. Forgive me for enjoying a scenario. I should adopt how you all play. Yes, the older days of Afterwind beta were much more fun for me. Playing as a global hegemon and doing the exact same thing in world games as I do now in UN. The only shitty thing about UN games are how often rebakes occur. I figure your anti-UN bias is much better than my pro.
---- Our Mahdi will have a broad forehead and a prominent nose. He will fill the earth with justice as it is filled with injustice and tyranny.
Lade...
Lade...
|
|
What this guy said
----
Lade...
Lade...
|
|
|
Lade...
Lade...
|
|
|
You know what I say? Remove allying altogether, that is the root of all these problems. As for UN you are completely blind to how bad the whole player base of UN is, it's not just for SP, they play it to have the feeling of some power and ordering everyone around. This isn't even proper RPing. The whole idea is fine but the reality of it isn't the same at all. AS for the idea of removing SP from UN, I do not think it should be just UN, it should be all scenarios and custom maps, there are a lot of unbalanced games out there so it's easier to earn SP from playing certain countries in them. Do you realise how rude nearly all UN players are? Surely there has to be something wrong here. I came into this game only a bit ago, now being a rank 6 and I hated UN right from the start, when I had no bias, without knowing anything of UN before.
Lade...
Lade...
|
|
Look like some one elo farms with not death ;^)
----
Lade...
Lade...
|
|
|
Lade...
Lade...
|
|
|
Lade...
Lade...
|
|
|
It evens out all the advantages (except premium) for not having to buy upgrades, but it doesn't give players anything to work towards. Some players would find it boring and quit without upgrades.
Lade...
Lade...
|
|
If I really wanted to farm SP I'd create an alt account each time the elo got too low, I just played those few games because he wants to get to 0 elo . I don't really care for it much anyway, a player can see your skill by playing you not by looking at your elo. It's a much better indicative of skill than elo.
Lade...
Lade...
|
|
You're generalizing my arguments. Anyway, no it is not stupid to remove SP from UN. UN invokes noob tactics and just sitting there gaining SP without needing any knowledge of strategy. This, coupled with the many players required to fuel UN, makes UN one of the only games that kills all others. You want the community to keep UN because people like the SP? My idea is that we remove SP and see how it goes. It isn't something hard to do. If people still play UN in such mass, clearly they do enjoy UN. However, that does not excuse the farming involved in nor the gross amount of players it robs away from other games. Sadly, it would seem UN keeping it's SP gains is in your personal interest seeing as you play them with much frequency. Now, do I mind alternatives? No, I don't. I welcome more ideas. But see, your idea is giving UN its own little chill spot. The problem remains: people are playing UNs just sitting there doing nothing instead of helping the rest of the community keep a steady flow. Your next idea, perhaps more solid, is keeping a level of consistency with UN- keeping UNs up so that noobies don't recreate their own. We have a big problem here too: What truly governs UN? You'd have to have a team of committed players to ensure that UNs don't get out of hand or farm. Otherwise, the effort of keeping UNs up is even more problematic. Finally- no you cannot do the exact same thing in world games. Most world games will force you to expand and fight for yourself in one way or another. UN doesn't offer that luxury. Then you have the problem with a moderating body itself- UN moderating entities may be corrupt and abuse their intended position. World games don't have that flaw. Now, if we did perhaps make a room for UN with the condition that there be a rank limit to enter- that's something. Maybe all Scenarios can adopt such a concept. I mean, really, who wants a WWII with a rank 1 player who stubbornly joins as Adolf Hitler... So with that said- I'd like to see opinions on that here as well.
---- "Do not pray for an easy life, pray for the strength to endure a difficult one"
Lade...
Lade...
|
|
I am pro-AW kid. UNs are anti-AW. Simple as that. AW as a whole feels the ramifications that UN causes. Your bias is centered around UNs, the thing hurting our community. In a way, you're suicidal. Supporting UN is the same thing as being against them. In the long run, UNs will kill the AW community and thus kill the cause of death- UNs. It's absurd to think you'd want your precious UN to die along with AW, instead of helping support propositions to continue their existence while suppressing their negative affects on the community.
---- "Do not pray for an easy life, pray for the strength to endure a difficult one"
Lade...
Lade...
|
|
In the original post, I defined UNs as more than the actual UN scenario. "Let us first understand what a UN is here. UN is any roleplaying game that centers around a union moderating the actions of other countries and their interactions with one another or the union itself. Typically, the United Nations is emulated in a "UN" game. The rules and regulations in UN don't matter or affect the definition. So long as a union is INTENDED or IMPLIED, it is still a UN. "
---- "Do not pray for an easy life, pray for the strength to endure a difficult one"
Lade...
Lade...
|
|
|
I think removing sp from un games would be a good idea. It is a good compromise 
---- ALL is fair in love and war. SO GET USED TO IT! You opinion is not recognized as being valid.
Lade...
Lade...
|
|
|
V it sounds to me your one of the die hard call of duty guys that care about xp or sp who really give a danm its just A GAME
----
Lade...
Lade...
|
|
You are a moron if you think this is about SP. For god's sake, it's about the damn AW itself. I love this game. I don't want to come online one year from now and find that this game is filled with nothing but UN-heads who know nothing about how to play other portions of the game. This is one of the best strategy games on the internet that I've found. I'm not going to let your stupid UNs potentially cripple the whole community, when we can all come to a simple resolution that will keep UNs up without them killing the community.
---- "Do not pray for an easy life, pray for the strength to endure a difficult one"
Lade...
Lade...
|
