|
|
Post by Sir Fred of Etruria on May 23, 2008 0:06:08 GMT -5
We've been having a hell of a time battling suspected zergs. But I realized, we don't have our own policy. How can we ask for help with zerg PKers when we don't have an official stance on the issue.
This is the official policy as stated in the wiki.
How strict should we interpret the rules of alt abuse for our members?
|
|
|
|
Post by DT on May 23, 2008 9:49:04 GMT -5
I felt the need to add my own vote.
*goes off to fix an election*
|
|
|
|
Post by asshole doctor™ on May 23, 2008 15:19:28 GMT -5
follow wiki and the rff rules. fair is fair.
min of 10 spaces apart and they can't be working towards the sames goals.
or
having a alt at nichols and and alt in blackmore and rotating them is zerging.
now if you had your surviver alt in nichols restocking, and you than had a Pker or zombie alt attacking blackmore I would not considerate that zerging.
as long as you don't swing in with the other alt for a looksee than attack or defend or whatever.
god I hate cheaters.
|
|
|
|
Post by Magatsu Taito on May 23, 2008 15:27:25 GMT -5
I'm not voting, but I think you should keep your alts in different suburbs for the most part. And mainly just keep them separate.
|
|
|
|
Post by asshole doctor™ on May 23, 2008 15:39:18 GMT -5
can we keep this between QSG members only please this is a QSG policy vote.
thank you.
|
|
|
|
Post by Agent Redemption on May 23, 2008 23:40:10 GMT -5
if two alts are tag teaming a target in the same suburb on the same day that would be cheating in my book.
|
|
|
|
Post by Padre Romero on May 24, 2008 12:38:32 GMT -5
Here's my take:
Any game rules are going to exist out of utility...IE: making the game more fun and enjoyable for the most number of people.
The anti-alt abuse/anti-zerg rules exist to give each character the assurance that each character they encounter will be played by a dedicated player. Similar rules exist for Bots...it ruins the competitive spirit and (because I like RP-ing) make the game a little soulless if each persons controlling 15-20 characters merely to accomplish an objective.
The suburb boundaries don't exist primarily to enforce this rule...I always looked at them more as flavorful devisions of the city: if you're playing a reasonable 3-5 characters, there's really no reason why they shouldn't be MORE than a suburb apart. However, it's not de facto cheating if, say, one of your characters is carrying on a fight in ridleybank while another is defending Nichols mall. This is a really fuzzy area, and I think whether or not you're labeled a cheater in this case will depend largely on how sportsmanlike you are with your character.
Now: as for characters.
"working towards the same goal" is tircky...Sam and Padre (two of my characters) were both in the Angels for a while as a flavorful thing, until a lot of my opponents got angry. I generally justified this by saying that while they were in the same group, Padre usually charged about with the rest of the NMC and Sam hung around in Scarletwood and healed people...they were never even in the same corner of the city.
However, my opponents contended (perhaps rightfully) that they still had a similar goal: IE, promulgating angel-like ideals and recruiting characters for my faction. Sam and Padre also occasionally drew similar graffiti on different ends of the city and of course, both participated in the Flare Extravaganza...
I suppose this counts as working towards the same ends, but I don't consider it quite as messy as Salt-the-Earth and such policies, which aim to do actual damage to the other side. Nevertheless, I decided to avoid the controversy altogather and have Sam become an factionless character who continues to do all the same stuff he used to do...
Lets get some rule ultitarianism into the mix...here's how you know if it's right or wrong
before you do anything that may be questionably game-defying, ask yourself
"If everyone did this, would it be a fun game"
If the answer is no...you've made a mistake.
|
|
|
|
Post by peashooter on May 25, 2008 1:24:35 GMT -5
Good way to go about it. I have four characters I play currently. They are all in different groups, and they all have different objectives. It's easy to keep them separate if you do that. If two different groups happen to be working on the same objective, I figure it isn't 'that' much of a problem as if it were two alts always working together.
I look at it from a roleplaying point of view: Your characters are their own beings. If they happen to cross paths once and a while, as long as they behave like two different beings, then there isn't a problem. If they 'always' work together and travel together, it just seems weird. Like when friends become too good of friends and start completing each others sentences.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sir Fred of Etruria on May 25, 2008 11:53:38 GMT -5
Yes, I think actually roleplaying in this zombie apocalypse is the best way to keep alts apart.
I have three (or four) characters who all have very different lives. One is a pacifist, one's a murderer, and one's a nomad. So far, these guys haven't run into each other. I eventually pulled a combatant out of a group who kept being ordered into alt conflict with a character of mine. And I've seen other people having to "move their character" when a combat group was ordered into an area. Is moving out of an area to avoid alt conflict zerging?
|
|
|
|
Post by randomdead on May 25, 2008 12:02:03 GMT -5
Well I "play" a few other characters but not in any conventional sense of the game. One of my alts is a rare art collector, I set up galleries in distinguished locals in various suburbs. My other alt is a ghost who haunts a hotel that shares the same name as her in Eastonwood. She has been there for over 2 years. I have played this game so many different ways that I am always trying to find new and quirky activities for my characters to do. There are sooo many possibilities, and I respect the whole zombie/human battle but you can only take so many years of that. Urban Dead may be a simple game but you are only bounded by the limits of your imagination. Let it run free!
|
|
|
|
Post by asshole doctor™ on May 25, 2008 12:02:07 GMT -5
no.
|
|
|
|
Post by randomdead on May 25, 2008 12:05:01 GMT -5
I'm declaring war on your imagination! |
|
|
|
Post by DT on May 25, 2008 13:08:17 GMT -5
Yes, I think actually roleplaying in this zombie apocalypse is the best way to keep alts apart. I have three (or four) characters who all have very different lives. One is a pacifist, one's a murderer, and one's a nomad. So far, these guys haven't run into each other. I eventually pulled a combatant out of a group who kept being ordered into alt conflict with a character of mine. And I've seen other people having to "move their character" when a combat group was ordered into an area. Is moving out of an area to avoid alt conflict zerging? I quote Asshole when I say: "no." |
|
|
|
Post by peashooter on May 26, 2008 1:29:21 GMT -5
yeah, that would be the 'opposite' of zerging. making sure your characters do not work together to either work towards a similar goal or aid each other is an example of preventing zerging.
|
|
|
|
Post by asshole doctor™ on May 26, 2008 5:40:39 GMT -5
thats what i meant to say. darn iphone
|
|
