Nice and Nasty Players

Osmium_Planet · 2014-03-26 05:43:41

Is it just me, or do you find that there are nice and nasty players on this? Which are you?

Like NICE things are:

1. Robbing $0 vaults to increase your bounty.
2. NOT killing the children, unless you do one in front of the welcome mat.
3. When you see a nice trap you want to use whilst 2k scouting, killing yourself instead of escaping.
4. 2k Suicide runs on cheaper houses, suicide at the vault.
5. Making a puzzle house, not a chance death trap.
6. Doing funny stuff when safe and robbing houses.
7. Dying with style.

NASTY is

1. Killing the children for no good reason.
2. Robbing a player with $200 using $5k tools. Just because.
3. Keeping your infinite death trap broken farm house on the main page
4. Being called John Dick Hardman...

Any other morality points on this game? (Not wife killing and stealing, because that's the whole blinking point!)

JoyOfTrapping · 2014-03-26 09:28:27

There are two types of players that play this game.

1) People with guilt and shame complexes/road blocks in mastering the skill set:

-Feel bad when completing the games designed-in objectives
-Engage in seemingly "pro-social" behavior, thereby artificially imbalancing the "Neighborhood Order" by encouraging and enabling players without the requisite skill sets to persist in the game world for a longer-than-normal amount of time.
-Spend time doing things that make them feel better about themselves, while rationalizing and justifying the behavior as "nice," or reflective of some form of "maturity" or "Gamer Honor."

2) Warriors/people with jobs/people with less free time on their hands/internal reality is too well organized to justify time spent on an FFA/PVP video game giving total strangers digital pats on the back:

-Reinforces actual/real "Darwinian" Neighborhood Order by providing real consequences for players who are not recognizing the game objectives, or do not possess the requisite skill sets to achieve the game objectives. These Warrior players represent "Truth."
-Teach players still climbing the learning curve through direct action.
-Engage in anti-social behavior which weeds out internally conflicted players, who will eventually make the obligatory forum post about how the game is broken and the community is full of idiots, and never play again. This is called "Natural Selection."
-Gain a masterful understanding of the game's mechanics, qualifying them to become teachers and advice-givers on the game forums, thereby benefiting the entire community.
-Engage in senseless violence or anti-social behavior for fun: their internal value system is configured realistically enough to confer the understanding that they paid these $16 to pursue two ends- achievement of game objectives by following a pre-defined set of game rules, and entertainment value.

Blip · 2014-03-26 10:11:29

Well, the Castle Doctrine is an incredibly vicious game, with very little protecting new players from the veterans. Not only that, but truly dedicated players are willing to go pretty far to do very well: I doubt that I'm the only one who uses my alt account and the houses of the poor to transfer massive bounties of $10k+ to my main account. However, this isn't to be frowned upon! It's how the game works, and calling players "nasty" just because they do something that's in their advantage is ridiculous.

As JoT said, other actions that are considered "nasty" or "bad playing" really are only done for entertainment value. It's a video game. If I'm bored and want to use $2k tools on a $300 house, I have every right to do it - I paid for the game, didn't I?

Osmium_Planet · 2014-03-26 13:01:49

Fair enough I know it's ok to do whatever you want. It's a really really harsh game, competitively speaking.

I was just wondering if anyone else had any morality ideas.

Your two ideas are fine, don't get me wrong. I just had to somehow define them, and 'nasty' seemed useful.

StefanLindskog · 2014-03-26 13:06:09

JoyOfTrapping be like: Tha world iz blacknwhite an I luvz myself, bitches!
Blip be like: I payed for the game. Ya'll accept me being a dick and feeling no shame!

TheRealCheese · 2014-03-26 13:14:20

While dickish behavior is part of the game, and any game really, I don't see how you can justify gaining an advantage over these 'noob' players by abusing two accounts.

Leveller · 2014-03-26 13:46:48

Get 3 accounts. Account 1: Main.

Account 2 rob account 3 over and over. 3 just walks to vault to reset.
Account 2 keeps robbing 3 1000000000 times. 500$ bounty per robbery.

Account 2 die at main account.

Account 3 rob account 2 over and over and over.
Account 3 die at main account for 100000000000000000$ bounty..

Game won.

Blip · 2014-03-26 13:56:38

Leveller wrote:

Get 3 accounts. Account 1: Main.
Account 2 rob account 3 over and over. 3 just walks to vault to reset.
Account 2 keeps robbing 3 1000000000 times. 500$ bounty per robbery.
Account 2 die at main account.
Account 3 rob account 2 over and over and over.
Account 3 die at main account for 100000000000000000$ bounty..

Game won.

Wait WUT! That would legitimately work! Now I feel the urge to spend $16 more on this game.

Of course, I won't, but that's crazy...

joshwithguitar · 2014-03-26 15:34:50

Blip wrote:

Leveller wrote:
Get 3 accounts. Account 1: Main.
Account 2 rob account 3 over and over. 3 just walks to vault to reset.
Account 2 keeps robbing 3 1000000000 times. 500$ bounty per robbery.
Account 2 die at main account.
Account 3 rob account 2 over and over and over.
Account 3 die at main account for 100000000000000000$ bounty..

Game won.
Wait WUT! That would legitimately work! Now I feel the urge to spend $16 more on this game.
Of course, I won't, but that's crazy...

Well, you could even do it with two, just leave out acc 1, have acc 2 die in 3 and build your dream house.

This one wouldn't be too hard to fix though - Jason could add a bounty timeout every time you rob a place so that you don't get a vault bounty off a house that you robbed within X hours. Perhaps we should email him about this one or do you think he frequents the forums enough now to catch it?

I'm concerned that these kinds of exploits are starting to become a big part of the game and I'm not sure Blip that this shouldn't be "frowned upon". Advantages that are only available to those who have paid more money for another account is starting to become "pay to win" which is not so cool. I don't think there is much single account activity that should be frowned upon though (besides blatant cheating). People will be nasty but that is part of the game. Being nasty does not have to be though, you can play as nice or as nasty as you want. Intentionally exploiting 2 accounts is going too far though in my opinion.

cullman · 2014-03-26 17:19:35

Yeah I don't think two accounts is in the spirit of the game or Jason wouldn't have put measures in there to prevent it.

JoyOfTrapping · 2014-03-26 18:10:12

StefanLindskog wrote:

JoyOfTrapping be like: Tha world iz blacknwhite an I luvz myself, bitches!
Blip be like: I payed for the game. Ya'll accept me being a dick and feeling no shame!

Come on now, come on. Stefan, I've always been very cordial to you on these forums.

This person legitimately asked for other peoples' moral perspectives on the game. The above is mine. He divided the community along certain lines. My response was, given the behaviors he identified, that I would divide those categories on differently described lines, and that was my moral perspective.

This is an ffa/pvp game and aggressive behaviors are what evolve it; we should not judge them selectively or frown upon them.

Now can we please take the dual account discussion which is all the rage these days to a separate thread? Everyone's points are valid here but at the same time the OP made his thread about something different.

PsyBlade · 2014-03-27 00:21:26

Well, the Castle Doctrine is an incredibly vicious game, with very little protecting players from hacking. Not only that, but truly dedicated players are willing to go pretty far to do very well: I doubt that I'm the only one who uses a modified client to view the whole map. However, this isn't to be frowned upon! It's how the game works, and calling players "nasty" just because they do something that's in their advantage is ridiculous.

As JoT said, other actions that are considered "nasty" or "bad playing" really are only done for entertainment value. It's a video game. If I'm bored and want to use my maphack to strip the house list bare, I have every right to do it - I paid for the game, didn't I?

MMaster · 2014-03-27 01:36:27

joshwithguitar wrote:

Well, you could even do it with two, just leave out acc 1, have acc 2 die in 3 and build your dream house.
This one wouldn't be too hard to fix though - Jason could add a bounty timeout every time you rob a place so that you don't get a vault bounty off a house that you robbed within X hours. Perhaps we should email him about this one or do you think he frequents the forums enough now to catch it?
I'm concerned that these kinds of exploits are starting to become a big part of the game and I'm not sure Blip that this shouldn't be "frowned upon". Advantages that are only available to those who have paid more money for another account is starting to become "pay to win" which is not so cool. I don't think there is much single account activity that should be frowned upon though (besides blatant cheating). People will be nasty but that is part of the game. Being nasty does not have to be though, you can play as nice or as nasty as you want. Intentionally exploiting 2 accounts is going too far though in my opinion.

EDIT: Scratch this - it is for different thing. It seems there is nothing stopping such behaviour.
There is something similar in the server:

// how many times vault can be reached before player stops earning vault
// salary
$vaultReachLimit = 4;

EDIT: Anyway - more accounts = more money. I still think that doing something like that only gives you some time advantage - your house won't be any better and you won't be better robber. It just takes you less time to get money. Is it cheating? Technically yes. Is it really game breaking? I don't think so. But if it would be somehow solved of course the game would be better.

EDIT2: This seems like the thing (I knew I saw it somewhere):

// how long before another bounty can be added to a player for reaching
// the same house's vault again?
$vaultBountyTimeout = "0 1:00:0.000";

What can also help is to force ignore the house as soon as you rob it - doesn't matter if you broke something or not.

Last edited by MMaster (2014-03-27 02:20:19)

Suedeo · 2014-03-27 11:34:43

MMaster wrote:

EDIT: Anyway - more accounts = more money. I still think that doing something like that only gives you some time advantage - your house won't be any better and you won't be better robber. It just takes you less time to get money. Is it cheating? Technically yes. Is it really game breaking? I don't think so. But if it would be somehow solved of course the game would be better.

- In FPS games, using an Aimbot only gives a player some advantages with aiming and shooting, but doesn't help with other skills such as like map awareness and teamwork.

- In RTS games, using a maphack only gives a player some advantages with map awareness and scouting, but doesn't help with other skills such as resource management and unit micro.

I don't like Aimbots and Maphacks, and I get annoyed whenever I see them because in my opinion, games are always better when players compete on a level playing field.

Sometimes, when I am handily defeated by a player who used a grey-area advantage, I am tempted to even the playing field by making sure I have what they have. That is not desired behavior, nor is it good sportsmanship... more like human nature.

The bottom line is, TCD's bounty system and money awards, as they stand, are being increasingly abused. Will this change or will it stay the same?

mala · 2014-03-27 20:12:00

joshwithguitar wrote:

Perhaps we should email him about this one or do you think he frequents the forums enough now to catch it?
I'm concerned that these kinds of exploits are starting to become a big part of the game and I'm not sure Blip that this shouldn't be "frowned upon". Advantages that are only available to those who have paid more money for another account is starting to become "pay to win" which is not so cool. I don't think there is much single account activity that should be frowned upon though (besides blatant cheating). People will be nasty but that is part of the game. Being nasty does not have to be though, you can play as nice or as nasty as you want. Intentionally exploiting 2 accounts is going too far though in my opinion.

I don't know if he follows the forum close enough to catch it, but the issue lately is the most discussed across the forum, maybe the email would be the best solution.

I agree that it's not gamebreaking (no one can buy skill) but it can be quite an advantage to skip poverty to join the middleclass right after a fresh start

joshwithguitar · 2014-03-27 21:02:07

MMaster wrote:

EDIT2: This seems like the thing (I knew I saw it somewhere):
// how long before another bounty can be added to a player for reaching
// the same house's vault again?
$vaultBountyTimeout = "0 1:00:0.000";
What can also help is to force ignore the house as soon as you rob it - doesn't matter if you broke something or not.

Ok, so it looks like Jason already thought of this - you can get a maximum bounty of $500 an hour by robbing your second account, which is nothing special. This also applies to repeat robbing $0 houses every time the returns - so I imagine a lot of the extreme $0 robbing behaviour seen has been a bit over the top.

There is still the potential to build a large bounty from robbing easy houses and killing easy wives and children. Using bounties from broken houses to feed a main has been a known exploit for a while now (http://thecastledoctrine.net/forums/vie … php?id=513) and I don't see it going away any time soon. The best we can do is label it bad behaviour and make it clear that it is not in the spirit of the game. It isn't a grey area, it is simply cheating.

MMaster · 2014-03-28 05:21:05

Suedeo wrote:

MMaster wrote:
EDIT: Anyway - more accounts = more money. I still think that doing something like that only gives you some time advantage - your house won't be any better and you won't be better robber. It just takes you less time to get money. Is it cheating? Technically yes. Is it really game breaking? I don't think so. But if it would be somehow solved of course the game would be better.
- In FPS games, using an Aimbot only gives a player some advantages with aiming and shooting, but doesn't help with other skills such as like map awareness and teamwork.
- In RTS games, using a maphack only gives a player some advantages with map awareness and scouting, but doesn't help with other skills such as resource management and unit micro.
I don't like Aimbots and Maphacks, and I get annoyed whenever I see them because in my opinion, games are always better when players compete on a level playing field.
Sometimes, when I am handily defeated by a player who used a grey-area advantage, I am tempted to even the playing field by making sure I have what they have. That is not desired behavior, nor is it good sportsmanship... more like human nature.
The bottom line is, TCD's bounty system and money awards, as they stand, are being increasingly abused. Will this change or will it stay the same?

I don't think that it can be compared like that. Shooting and aiming is one of the main points of FPS and map exploring is one of the main points of RTS .. maybe you can compare it like this:
In FPS you have different weapons and there are some that you need to gain somehow by playing the game - or you can buy it from your friend for real money (against the game rules). Having better weapon does not make you shoot better or aim better, but makes your life easier because you have higher damage.
In RTS you have different units and there are some that you need to gain somehow by playing the game - or you can buy it from your friend for real money (against the game rules). Having those units does not make you better strategist or better player, but having it makes your life easier because you have better units than other players at your level. However other players can achieve the same after playing it for longer time than you did.

What you explained can be compared to castle doctrine to players that use map hacks to see whole house. You don't get aimbot or map hack after playing FPS/RTS game for 2 weeks, but you can get enough money in castle doctrine after playing for 2 weeks. Money is not the main point of castle doctrine - you can have all the money in the world and not be able to build successful house and you can have all the money in the world and still die like a noob in house you are robbing. It's big difference when you compare it to aimbot where you kill people just by pressing mouse button.

Sure it is still cheating as it is not supposed to be part of this game, but I see it more like buying better hero for real money rather than playing it for 1 month to get the hero for in-game points. I don't say it should stay like it is, but I also don't think it is as big advantage as some players say.

PsyBlade · 2014-03-28 06:32:09

With unlimited funds you need no skill other than not walking directly into a deadly tile.

Even if someone robbed you you can simply generate some new money to fix up your house and buy tools.
You can simply throw away any money you don't need right now massively reducing the chance that someone tries to rob you.
You can immediately build a finished house removing most danger of being robbed.

You bring any amount of tools making robbing easy and danger free.
There is nothing else to do for you other that quash non-cheaters with your unlimited tools (that part especially is very aimbot-like).

You can buy every picture you like.

JoyOfTrapping · 2014-03-28 11:52:34

MMaster's post makes some serious sense.

The Castle Doctrine Forums

#1 2014-03-26 05:43:41

Nice and Nasty Players

#2 2014-03-26 09:28:27

Re: Nice and Nasty Players

#3 2014-03-26 10:11:29

Re: Nice and Nasty Players

#4 2014-03-26 13:01:49

Re: Nice and Nasty Players

#5 2014-03-26 13:06:09

Re: Nice and Nasty Players

#6 2014-03-26 13:14:20

Re: Nice and Nasty Players

#7 2014-03-26 13:46:48

Re: Nice and Nasty Players

#8 2014-03-26 13:56:38

Re: Nice and Nasty Players

#9 2014-03-26 15:34:50

Re: Nice and Nasty Players

#10 2014-03-26 17:19:35

Re: Nice and Nasty Players

#11 2014-03-26 18:10:12

Re: Nice and Nasty Players

#12 2014-03-27 00:21:26

Re: Nice and Nasty Players

#13 2014-03-27 01:36:27

Re: Nice and Nasty Players

#14 2014-03-27 11:34:43

Re: Nice and Nasty Players

#15 2014-03-27 20:12:00

Re: Nice and Nasty Players

#16 2014-03-27 21:02:07

Re: Nice and Nasty Players

#17 2014-03-28 05:21:05

Re: Nice and Nasty Players

#18 2014-03-28 06:32:09

Re: Nice and Nasty Players

#19 2014-03-28 11:52:34

Re: Nice and Nasty Players

Board footer