Mon Nov 30 16:59:25 2009

At 11 o'clock PM, Day of Thunder, 31st of the Month of the Ancient Darkness
on the Theran calendar Macaca perished, never to return.

Hey, we didnt get to interact a whole lot but you were solid. Hope to see you in village again.

I liked this Battlerager. You roleplayed the 'dumb' giant rather well. I'm actually very sorry I wasn't able to reward you for completing my task.

Time has been a bitch lately.

The one moment I was about to drop a tattoo on you, you logged right when I made a move toward you. Then this thread.

I'm having a hard time coming to grips with Battle lately. For some odd reason, members of Battle think being suicidal equates to Courage. It's been bugging me and was one of the main reasons I wanted you to kill Lirad. He was taking advantage of predicting you.

I want Battle to start anticipating enemies and to stop being so predictable. When Empire takes the head and has 5 defenders, a single BattleRager running right into Imperial lands is pretty easy to predict and defeat.

Anyhow, good character. Play a smart elf Rager next. I want to see more strategy!

>I want Battle to start anticipating enemies and to stop being
>so predictable. When Empire takes the head and has 5
>defenders, a single BattleRager running right into Imperial
>lands is pretty easy to predict and defeat.

But... "logout" is predictable too.

>Anyhow, good character. Play a smart elf Rager next. I want
>to see more strategy!

I can't comment on the current ragers because I haven't seen most of them in action but I would say that silent classes (thieves/assassins/dagger specs) can retrieve even against such odds.
And when I see logs of 5 ragers coming to the imperial lands for the head and still manage to die several times I start to cry.
Damnit, put some strategy into craniling a solo bard.

>>I want Battle to start anticipating enemies and to stop
>being
>>so predictable. When Empire takes the head and has 5
>>defenders, a single BattleRager running right into Imperial
>>lands is pretty easy to predict and defeat.
>
>But... "logout" is predictable too.
>


Despite all the evidence to the contrary, you think I logged out to avoid you. Why don't you crawl into your little vodka drenched hole with Beront and go away now?

Reality check: You played a powerhouse AP that somehow managed to take the most cowardly approach to every situation. The reason why you are bored with CF is because you have an unbearingly boring playstyle. Take a risk next time, stop trolling other characters OOC, and you might have fun again.

I actually wasn't pointing in you or any particular villager. I just meant that it is much more predictable that a single rager will not come (or even logout) than otherwise. Chances that a single rager coming to retrieve will surprise everyone are quite high.
Personally, I don't think I would bother to sit with centurions at the Palace if there are 5 imperials online and only one rager.

> Despite all the evidence to the contrary, you think I logged out to avoid you.

> stop trolling other characters OOC, and you might have fun again.

Since you decided to bring trolling/OOC/and neverquiting up...
A short log after the fight on the voralian river:

// 25 Oct 2009
// ========================================================
 
<51 Felar Thi> (PK) Sashrimito the Hand of the Unseen
<51 Arial War> (PK) (WANTED) Malakhi Malakhar the Pitiless Warped Phoenix, Reaper of the Arcane, Commander of Battle
<49 Gnome Shf> (PK) Vrilon the Grand Sorcerer of Transformation
<51 Arial War> (PK) Gyrlion the Legend of the Battlefield
*51 Duerg A-P* (PK)  Gzurweeg the Fist of Darkness, Imperial Dread Lord
<51 Dwarf War> (PK) (WANTED) Fulgrum the Legend of the Battlefield, Stonemason
<48 Felar Ran> (PK) Imrri the Lady of the Falling Leaves
 
Players found: 7
 
 
<1016 70 1635 15:00 wilderness outdoor> 
Malakhi has fled!
People near you:
(PK) Sashrimito                   Amidst the Currents of Voralia's Tears
(PK) Malakhi                      A Bend in Voralia's Tears
(PK) Gzurweeg                     A Bend in Voralia's Tears
(PK) Fulgrum                      Amidst the Currents of Voralia's Tears
Malakhi is gushing blood. 
 
<1016 70 1635 15:00 wilderness outdoor> 
His feet aren't on the ground.
Malakhi is gushing blood. 
 
<1016 70 1635 15:00 wilderness outdoor> lashes
You give Malakhi a brutal lashing with a whip made of six living snakes to break his will!
Malakhi yells 'Augh!  The pain!  Anything to make it stop!'
Your brutal lashing MASSACRES Malakhi!
Your brutal lashing MASSACRES Malakhi!
As you lash Malakhi, a spurt of blood squirts from the vicious wound!
Your brutal lashing MANGLES Malakhi!
Your brutal lashing DISMEMBERS Malakhi!
You parry Malakhi's defilement.
Malakhi's defilement wounds you.
Your shocking bite *** DEVASTATES *** Malakhi!
Malakhi parries your shocking bite.
Your defilement MASSACRES Malakhi!
Malakhi is DEAD!!
You sense a mystical boost to your innate magical abilities.
A whip made of six living snakes glows with unholy light as it steals a piece of Malakhi's mind.
A piercing howl emanates from a whip made of six living snakes as its hunger increases.
A whip made of six living snakes glows with unholy light as it steals a piece of Malakhi's soul.
A whip made of six living snakes shrieks as it savagely feeds on the soul of Malakhi.
A whip made of six living snakes glows with unholy light as it steals a piece of Malakhi's mind.
A whip made of six living snakes glows with unholy light as it steals a piece of Malakhi's mind.
A whip made of six living snakes shrieks as it savagely feeds on the mind of Malakhi.
A whip made of six living snakes glows with unholy light as it steals a piece of Malakhi's mind.
A whip made of six living snakes glows with unholy light as it steals a piece of Malakhi's mind.
A whip made of six living snakes shrieks as it savagely feeds on the mind of Malakhi.
A whip made of six living snakes glows with unholy light as it steals a piece of Malakhi's soul.
A whip made of six living snakes glows with unholy light as it steals a piece of Malakhi's soul.
A whip made of six living snakes glows with unholy light as it steals a piece of Malakhi's soul.
A piercing howl emanates from a whip made of six living snakes as its hunger increases.
A whip made of six living snakes glows with unholy light as it steals a piece of Malakhi's mind.
A piercing howl emanates from a whip made of six living snakes as its hunger increases.
A whip made of six living snakes glows with unholy light as it steals a piece of Malakhi's mind.
A piercing howl emanates from a whip made of six living snakes as its hunger increases.
'Mana Crusher', Ooqogar's Hammer vaporizes, returning to its true owner.
 
// ========================================================
 
Malakhi tells you 'Is there a reason why you destroyed everything I wore?'
 
You tell Malakhi 'Personal hate'
 
Malakhi tells you 'I could have left.'
 
You tell Malakhi 'Like usually?'
 
Malakhi tells you 'I have always fought you.'
 
You tell Malakhi 'I think otherwise'
 
Malakhi tells you 'I think you have a short memory.'
 
Malakhi tells you 'But now, I will not.'
 
<845 331 1641 12:00 civilized indoor> repl So nothing will change.
Malakhi is ignoring you.
 

he is just a little whiny boy, who needs imms to defend him from russians. Even 4 legacy don't help him against russians. What is your ratio against russians? 0 vs......20-25?

Way to be.

Definitely 0 vs. ?? against Kjrorh and Gzurweeg, though. Good job.

You're classless and an idiot. Malakhi's response above was spot-on.

what will you say if there will be posted more than 5 logs with Malakhi quitting after 15 mins begin online?

as in, the player...I wouldn't think anything of it. He plays CF like CF should be played. Yes, better than the both of you.

~

If someone can produce 5 logs where you're on with an ally who plays from the same country, you're cheating and have to be denied.

it's your game Except it does not break a single rule.

I'm sure at some point one of imms checked out Malakhi login/logout timing but you decided he did not do it to avoid pk with Gzur because he died to Gzur quite a few times

p.s. I'm sure there are slightly more than 5 logs of speedy logouts. While few could happen because rl thing... but when there are so much of them.. it's something to think about. Even then probably he is not guild... or may be he is. I don't care.

~

Always quitting to avoid PK is lame. Coordinating your logins in a big perma so you can form invincible gangs is lame too. As is full looting someone because they didn't give you charges.

How about everyone shows a bit more sportsmanship and then everyone will be happy!

>As is full looting someone because they didn't give you
>charges.

LOOT NOLOOT LOOTING
There are no restrictions on looting here, since we like to encourage
the circulation of equipment. Note that players who do not have a
PK range (i.e., those level 10 and below) may not loot player corpses
except their own.

Looting inside some city limits may violate the laws; see HELP LAWS for full
information. If this happens to you, take your case to a member of the Blood
Tribunal. (NOTE: it doesn't violate any rules, so the Immortals don't deal
with looting).

See also: LAWS RULES

In short, if you leave things to someone, it is a gift.
If you feel that someone did not deserved this gift this time, you are free to revoke your gift. This is not lame or shameful by any means.
CF is plagued by players who FEEL that their opponents MUST grant them this gift. They are misguided and probably should play WoW instead.

While this is all basically true, so is everything in the post you're responding to.

At times I do wonder if you have a concept of sportsmanship.

>At times I do wonder if you have a concept of sportsmanship.

At times I do wonder if you were less whiny in the past.
Honestly, don't turn yourself into the imm version of Abernyte or you will end up with seeing every loot as bad sportsmanship.

I believe you will miss what I was trying to say in my previous post, so I'm elaboration:

In a broader sense, many PKs are "bad" sportsmanship. Whether it was gang, killimg someone while having higher damroll or being boneshattered from his previous fight, or being a rhino against a gnome, or just killing someone who is not ready.
Applying a concept out of context isn't great idea even if we talk about sportsmanship.

If you or somebody else whould full loot someone being momentally overwhelmed by rage and thus think that it's what I did, then call it a bad sportsmanship... Well I don't have this kind of issues. I never rage deleted a character, I don't OOC trash talk my enemies even if I just got killed by them and lost 300 charges.
All full loots I've pulled where pulled while being cold and on purpose. They were sort of "educational actions". Hints to let someone know that they are executing bad sportsmanship. Whether it be quitting to avoid pk or spending an hour exploring Pine forest as a rager while there are bad mages online looking for you and then trying to do something cheap when being found.

>I believe you will miss what I was trying to say in my
>previous post, so I'm elaboration:
>

>All full loots I've pulled where pulled while being cold and
>on purpose. They were sort of "educational actions". Hints to
>let someone know that they are executing bad sportsmanship.

We clearly disagree, but I think this is the apotheosis of bad sportsmanship.

I have to think on some level you can understand that if everyone applied your principle -- if I think someone else is doing something ####ty, I will escalate and be an even bigger asshole -- any game would fall apart.

Think about all the things that other players have (mostly unfairly) accused you of in the last year, and assume that they responded this style. Assume everyone who accused you of coordinating logins or perma'ing with Ahtieli (which, to be clear, I don't think you did) made their own bigger perma to repeatedly gang you as an "educational action." (Or, if you don't think that would do it, maybe they make gangs of Empire that are willing to betray you and get thrown out of Empire just to full loot you once, or whatever seems like it could work even if it's super ####ty.) Afterwards, they would tell you you deserved it for your coordinated logins and that you needed to be taught a lesson. How fun would that be?

>I have to think on some level you can understand that if
>everyone applied your principle -- if I think someone else is
>doing something ####ty

Thing is:
We are not talking whether my assumptions were correct. I think they were, you think they were not. At least I presented more quality arguments to defend my point compared with yours. But it is offtopic anyway.
You're talking about "bad" sportsmanship even given we both assume I was correct in my estimation (just assume). That's a different topic that I address here.

>Afterwards, they would tell
>you you deserved it for your coordinated logins and that you
>needed to be taught a lesson. How fun would that be?

If I will do a coordinated login and they will teach me for then I will be grateful for the lesson. That is. Perhaps, you or Isildur will go mad. I will not.

You've missed or chosen to ignore the point, which is: you've advocated for being punished for things whether or not you actually did them.

I'm not advocating for being punished for things that you didn't do.
Mistakes may happen and they can be called exactly as "mistakes", not "bad sportsmanship". But again, that's offtopic or you're trying to lead us into a rat hole.

I will reproduce the thread for you, so you would better follow it:

NMtehW says: "... As is full looting someone because they didn't give you charges. How about everyone shows a bit more sportsmanship and then everyone will be happy!"

Here he talks about looting for not giving charges and makes a hint that that is a bad sportsmanship. Look carefully, he doesn't talk about looting after wrongly assuming that somebody not giving charges. His point remains the same even if "not giving charges" actually happened.

I disagreed with him. My point was that not giving a gift (not looting) to someone who actually did some bad sportsmanship stuff (like not giving charges) is not lame, nor bad sportsmanship. In fact, it's orthogonal issue which I explaned later.

And then you popped from nowhere and start to ask if I "have a concept of sportsmanship".

Actually, even if person A punishes person B where B didn't do anything wrong, I would think twice before calling it bad sportsmanship in case that A have many valid points to assume something.
In reality, you can't be completely sure about anything.
For example, if you see someone who logouts every time he sees you and it happens 9 times of 10 every week during several months it makes sense to assume that he is actully logouts because of you.
Can you be 100% sure? Of course, not. Maybe he was just losing link in all those cases because of hurricanes.
Here is where you need to rely on experience and indirect facts to come to a conclusion. That's how this world works. Notice, I don't even hint here if your conclusion was wrong or not. I'm talking about the motivation, decision making process and fariness in it.
So, to simplify things:
1) If you observe something in 99% cases over a long period and make some actions based on it, I would say you had "rights" to make the conclusion you made. Thus, it's not "bad sportsmanship", "lame" or whatever. Even if you actually are mistaken it is (just) a mistake.
2) If you observe something happened twice in a year and make baseless conclusion to punish someone, or just decide that because you were mad or(and) an asshole. Then yeah, it can be called "bad sporstmansship" even if you actually magically were right.

Nep is right - you haven't the faintest clue what sportsmanship is. You are like the embarrassing father who thrashes his 5 year old son at tennis, and then has a tantrum when the son doesn't want to play any more.

Please don't play an AP again. It's clearly affected your sense of judgement and proportion.

Dwoggurd is right.. at least as I see it. But it's not all that important.

Important thing that he has logic in his posts and actualy write with using logic. While you pretty much just ignore all his logical constructions and call him "not having sportsmanship" without using logic in your posts. I love US people you are always like this.

Few more points.

1. I'm 100% sure that 99,9% of Gzurweeg enemies would not show him good sportsmanship if they killed him. Because they will sacrifice his unholy(which has both rp and ooc reasons and actualy WAY worse than full looting), which is by YOUR definition is bad sportsmanship.

1.1. So basicly non of Gzur enemies deserved good sportsmanship from Dwoggurd.

1.2. Still 99% of his enemies were not full looted by Gzur and he actualy showed them UNDESERVED sportsmanship.

SUMMARY: Dwoggurd acted with more sportsmanship against 99,9% of people who did not DESERVE it by any means. While his enemies would acted without sportsmanship towards Dwoggurd, when Dwoggurd deserved it by not looting them(showing them sportsmanship).

I bet you will find few phrases from post above to comment but will ignore the rest.

2. Every evil char who full loots you have rp reasons but still it's more ooc desigion.

2.1. I don't see any difference between following ooc reasoning of full loots:
a. Because it's within my role (who made you play role of douche? Only your ooc reasoning)
b. Because he actualy breaks rules and piss me off by quitting, not following cabal rp and so on. (also ooc reasoning though I find it slightly better, because you don't act like douche to everyone but only to those who acts like douches to you).

>Important thing that he has logic in his posts and actualy
>write with using logic. While you pretty much just ignore all
>his logical constructions and call him "not having
>sportsmanship" without using logic in your posts.

Not that majority vote = truth, but I don't really see anyone but you guys agreeing with that. When I use reasoning to answer, it's pretty much just ignored.

I've got to stop posting on this topic, mostly because I have other things to do today besides beating my head against a brick wall more. Despite how much I apparently love beating my head against a brick wall.

w

nt

>When I use reasoning to answer, it's pretty much just ignored.

The part of it is you rarely using it. At least, you've failed to use in this thread.

>The part of it is you rarely using it. At least, you've failed
>to use in this thread.

Since you appear to honestly believe that your arguments are reasoned and mine aren't, there's clearly some kind of communication breakdown between us and I'll try to avoid wasting both of our time by responding to you less in the future.

>Important thing that he has logic in his posts and actualy
>write with using logic. While you pretty much just ignore all
>his logical constructions and call him "not having
>sportsmanship" without using logic in your posts. I love US
>people you are always like this.

I don't know if this is a translation issue, a cultural issue, or just two people who share a culture and language but don't understand the concept. But there's some fundamental misunderstanding here about what "sportsmanship" means. You seem to be using it somewhat like Justice or fairness. Whereas to us, it means something closer to honor, courtesy or generosity.

For example when you talk about someone not deserving sportsmanship... it just doesn't make sense, because that's just not what the word means. Sportsmanship is never deserved. It's not like a give and take kind of thing. Real sportsmanship is something you do even if the other guy is being a jerk, because it improves the overall quality of the game. If some guy mistreats you, so you mistreat him back, that's just bad sportsmanship on both people's part.

Really, think of sportsmanship like honor in CF. Just because people gang your honor character doesn't mean you can honorably gang them back. You can decide not to be honorable, or sportsmanlike because you want revenge, but you can't get that revenge and still show good sportsmanship.

Giving a lesson to someone is sometimes a good way to improve the game. It's like training a useful conditinal reflex. I'm not saying that every lesson is good and useful, I'm just saying it's not about sportsmanship, it's an orthogonal issue. It's neither bad or good sportsmanship.

If I cheat and an immortal punishes me for that does it means he has bad sportsmanship? He could be generious and allow me to cheat further.

... is what we're talking about.

I don't know what lesson you think you're teaching people by dropping full loots on them, but for sure, if I was fulled by an AP with 200+ charges (because I wouldn't fight him, feed him charges etc), it would probably make me quit to avoid PK even more. I play this game to have fun, not to regear just because I'm not playing the game how someone else wants me to.

Anyway, if people really are hiding from you in far flung places of Thera, isn't that enough of a victory in itself? Are you really punishing them for the horrible RP-crime of not suiciding on your unholy, or venting your OOC frustration that you can't get a fight?

I don't think I ever full looted anyone for just hiding from me somewhere in CF. Hiding is a part of the game and is perfectly valid strategy as long as you don't cross the line by completely breaking your cabal RP or even game rules.

I don't know what lesson you think you're teaching people by dropping full loots on them, but for sure, if I was fulled by an AP with 200+ charges (because I wouldn't fight him, feed him charges etc), it would probably make me quit to avoid PK even more.

You're probably "option 1" guy from here: I will add two more cents

Also, keep in mind, they if you don't fight an AP because you don't want to give him charges, that's borderline to OOC. Charges are the part of AP design.

Avoiding letting an AP suck your very soul out of your body with their unholy black magic sounds like an eminently reasonable strategy for self-preservation.

I suppose if you're playing a masochistic, suicidal gimp character, feeding an AP uncontrollably would be good rp. Otherwise: no. That is unpossible logicality, comrade.

And, to chime in: your "logical constructs", your "reasons" to defend your actions in opposition to Nep(and the rest of us, of course, excepting ganklich)'s "whiny American" appeal to pathos and sportsmanship is a fallacy. Nep is spot on when he says that you are promoting punishment regardless of whether a punish-worthy offense has been committed: ie., whining about Malakhi. Yes, your looting and other ic actions are perfectly legal within the rules of the game. However, you don't have a leg to stand on due to the appearance of ooc collusion with other characters. Enforcement of rules without evidence would get Malakhi, AND GZURWEEG AND AHTIELI all denied. We could all REPEATEDLY throw around accusations like you do. That's what he's saying. See, here I'm relying on the imm's ability to police their own game. I don't want russians policing it with their logic. The imm rules enforcement is what protects the game, and within this constructed situation, that's what we have to rely on. So, if they don't bust you, and they don't bust Malakhi, I have to assume that all are on the up-and-up. Also, on a side note, picking on one of the like... 3 active dudes in Battle is laughably bitchy and weak.

Also, your assertion that you're somehow helping, enlightening, or making a better game with petulant full-loots to anyone who doesn't come suicide on an always-wanded, super-charged, ganklich-centurion-hugging anti-paladin out on Eastern is ludicrous (do you see what I did there? I exaggerated, since although I've personally witnessed this behavior multiple times, I'm implying that it happened ALL the time, EVERY time, which isn't true. Do you know anybody who pulls this crap?).

To be sure, you three russians play intelligently and probably within the rules (as far as the current enforcement apparatus can detect. ooc collusion in a different language might be much more difficult to detect and prosecute, sadly). However, if characters like kjrorh, gzurweeg, and ahtieli are the pinnacles of russian play, I'll say that no matter how many pk's you get, you all still play like bitches. Maximizing advantage and minimizing disadvantage are fine if you have multiple hours to play each day, but now there's a fundamental disconnect between players trying to be part of a story and pk at the same time, and a contingent of powergamers gaming the system to give them minimal risk at all times, using shared knowledge to roll around in a curiously coordinated gank and obliterate all opposition, taking every opportunity to gain any advantage, and get vindictive and petty when their enemies don't present themselves on platters to be ground into hamburger. The nature of the game, is that it will reward with powerful secrets those who have time, experience, and the ooc contacts to know everything they can, and then to brainstorm the best way to combine and abuse it all. That's a problem belonging to CF itself: you're just the symptom.

In conclusion: It's within the rules for you to play like a bitch, but it's also within the rules for me to also play like a bitch, not come to defend or raid at risk (but god, how you will bitch like a whiny american on the forums and offer 5+ logs), always word at 1800 health, and then finally take you down luckily in a gang. I could also conclude that I just don't enjoy a game where I run the risk of getting ambushed by krilcov and robdarken throwaways if I'm not playing super-paranoid, or knowing I'll have you jackasses to deal with at hero, and spend my logins avoiding eastern because of summon-cent-ganklich traps, and spend my time on one of multifarious pleasurable hobbies and pursuits that demand my attention.

Break out your dictionary.

>In a broader sense, many PKs are "bad" sportsmanship. Whether
>it was gang, killimg someone while having higher damroll or
>being boneshattered from his previous fight, or being a rhino
>against a gnome, or just killing someone who is not ready.

None of those are "bad sportsmanship" per se. "Good sportsmanship" does not require you to avoid fights in which you enjoy a large advantage.

"Bad sportsmanship" would be killing a guy you outclass then hunting him down and doing it again 20 minutes later, assuming he didn't ask for it.

There is no fine line between them.
One may think that every PK (or other action) is fair as long as it doesn't break rules
Other may think that killing his mage with a levelsitting rager is unfair.

Personally, I was accused of cowardice in OOC sense by someone whom I slept (solo and fairly).

Out of curiosity, how far do you think sportsmanship should be taken?

I remember having a debate with shamanman once about ragers and sacrificing magical stuff. I felt as though a rager should always loot and destroy (sacrifice or Tahren) anything that is (Magical), including wands. He disagreed, citing sportsmanship, both as an IC and OOC factor.

Where do you draw the line between knowing that your character should want to, and would want to do something that you absolutely know will likely be interpreted at mean-spirited or griefing (even when it isn't), but at the same time, player-to-player, you want to be a good sport?

Sometimes I think people "talk the talk" of a hardliner or purist, be in Battle or Fort or whatever, but when it comes to taking actions that quite honestly make perfect sense IC, in an RP-enforced setting, they back down simply because they know that it will make a player feel bad.

I can totally understand going easy on someone in hopes they'll return the favor. What I'm referring to is when someone does it simply because they don't want to upset another player and not necessarily because they care about the IC consequences of being a jerk.

On one hand, CF is a game and people should enjoy it and enable others to enjoy it. On the other hand, CF is a RP-enforced fantasy game in which people usually have clearly defined roles that often not just allow them to, but very much encourage (or even obligate) them to do things that will make other players upset. Is it "bad" RP to bend your role in the name of sportsmanship any more or less than it is to bend your role for other, more selfish things?

He didn't say ANYTHING about your whiny ass. He was talking about players in general, because for years we see the picture: 3+ imperials are logging in - ofrtress/battle logs off. 3+ outlanders are logging in - everyone else are logging off (usually). 3+ scions are logging in - their foes logging off.

So, it's style of the play for many other players, not you personally. And this is disgusting and imho MUST BE punished, or at least not rewarded with lastnames, tittles and etc (as it is now).

But it's nice to see how you are defending yourself even if there were nothing about you. Guilty, guilty, don't deny it, or you wouldn't be so offended.

n/t

I'm not saying I'm all that...but I am saying, if I don't log off because of them, I doubt as many as you think do...do.

with few of your chars

I'm sure you understand that quite well. I never logged out because I was "overwhelmed" - again, read the comments on my pbfs. I'm wondering if the same would be said of yours?

I don't care much about Imm comments. They are not Gods after all . There are quite a lot of examples where they've been wrong or showed they have no clue about pk but we love and hate them anyway.

As for your comments. To me it looked like you played ballsy style only in order to get some imm perks, because as soon as you got "all" you wanted I've not seen that ballsy style anymore(though you still were solid). On the other hand I don't think reasoning for being ballsy is all that important because it does not make you less ballsy. Though I like and respect those who plays ballsy(don't mess it with being suicidal) because they like to play that way... much more than you

p.s. I'm sure I can roll char that will get a lot of imm love and awesome comments. Few of my past chars were somewhat close to that. Will it make me anywhere better player or make me like my char more? Of course no. And I'm sure not going to bring my imm comments into discussion to point out how cool I am.

It's not best idea to compare my char and shifter who has nearly nothing to lose(compared to my char). Who knows how would you play if you had my char? Roll one and show me how it should be done?

Minyar has a pathlogical need to face down groups too big for his own good or anything resembling intelligence. Not as every character or in every situation, but enough to leave an impression.

If you think he's trying to quit on you you're seeing what you want to see.

number of people in group reflect your dying chances. With nearly all my chars I prefer to fight with group of 3 smart people rather than with group of two. Of course it somewhat depends on my char and builds of my enemies.

I wasn't talking about Minyar personally. I was talking about players in general, and about your (imms) bad habbit to reward them for that, which is disgusting.

When I see people like Ilrek, or half of the today fortress - tittled levelsitter-captain, or mass logger/logoffers (and each of them have a nice tittle and, I am pretty sure, a good amount of imm exp orbonus edges) this really makes me sad.

In other words, nothing has changed since 2006. Nothing going to change it seems.

I relaly miss old good yeras when twinks were not allowed.

I'm trying to say there are plenty of people, who, like me, play when they can play and log out when they have to. Your characters have never been someting to make me log out, nor will they ever. They may make me be smart about where I walk, or if I leave myself a way out from somewhere. (When I say your, I mean Elhe's, I'm not sure who you have played, and unfortunately, we all know who ELhe's current is and what else that person has played.) I just think there are more people that don't really care about your chars than you think.

Again, what this all have to do with MY characters? I wasn't talking about myself, not was trying to say that I'm the GOD AND YOU MUST LOGOFF SOON AS I COME!

I am talking IN G-E-N-E-R-A-L. That if there are logging 3-4 strong players of the same cabal (no, not me!), half of the other players are logging off.

And this sucks, because they are getting rewarded, no matter of that.

Which sometimes leads to my biggest problem in CF, and that is getting upset when I get nearly eveyrthing taken from me. I have tried to be better since Lornis about this, and instead wreak my vengeance on someone with "turn-about" if I think it was needed. I truly think that some chars "need" to be full looted for game balance sake. Lornis probably was one that should have been. I laugh that Elhe is trying to say that when I got the Ice Drake I stopped being who I am. That is beyond laughable. Did I stop fighting Ahtieli in most cases....yep...want to know why...because all you do to shifters is "c forget." Would I in the same siutation...yep...probably. At least until I had killed that person a few times over the course of my life. So...don't be surprised when shifters don't want to come running at you when they don't have a great way to flee the scene.

The enemies that don't do this really stand out, because they are a small minority.

What's really annoying is when the powerhouses with all the whistles and bells do it.

First of all, what a stupid final death. I was still following Cyre
and waltzed straight into the Archmage while at very low health.

Then, as I fled, a vulture attacked me, naked and blind at night.
Pthtthtththtppthtpt!!!!!!!

So, this was my second hero, and only my fourth hero-rank character.
I learned a lot with Mac and I'm very thankful to everyone who aided
me.

IMMS: I wanted this character to get the sort of IMM love that none
of my previous characters did, so I resolved to put in the effort
to make that happen. Thror, I prayed at least half a dozen times
after I killed Lirad because I wanted so bad to bring you that
Rhino horn, but I guess I kept missing you. Also, I ran through the
last of my con crazy fast, so I figured the chance of getting
apprenticed was growing slimmer by he day. Thanks anway.

Battle:

Aze: You were great for most of Mac's life. Congrats on Heroimming.
Unless I'm badly mistaken I know when it's you on the newbie channel
and you need to know that you are exactly what this game needs to
keep on going.

Chief: I had so much run running around with you, especially late at
night. I also really liked your whole induction process. Keep it up.

Fulgrum: Great RP. Great Drillmaster. I had a great time with you,
too.

Growwlis: A role-model for Villagers everywhere.

Tyrnut: Probably one of the most educational characters I've ever
run into. Saying "yes" to "Help me with his crazy thing" is a sure-
fire way to learn something. Thanks for that.

Tok: Probably Mac's favorite other villager. Smashing stuff is good.
Thinking about consequences is bad.

Matren: I enjoyed your advice to "elude the lich." A brilliant
strategy that Mac could not seem to get the hang of.

Cyre, Gaelin, Ioram and the rest: Keep rolling. A strong Village is
an important part of a happy, healthy Thera.

Fort:
Dup: My Villagers always tend to share information with the Maran.
Sometimes they feel guilty about it, but after you saved Mac's ass
a few times he no longer felt guilt. Thanks.

Nexun:
Rhyaldrin: Awesome job.

Omsomqua: Keep it up.

Scion:
Tins: I'm very fond of your RP, even though there are limited
opportunities when I'm generally running from you. I did manage
to kill Kep that one time, which I'm quite proud of. I was kind of
shocked to realize that a lot of your enemies don't even know your
bad-ass familiar's name. I think that sort of thing should be
legendary in Thera. It's too bad. I'm looking forward to reading
your role.

Empire:
Dzintiri: You would have made an awesome villager.

Thanks guys. I owe you all. If I forgot you, drop a line and I'll
comment.

I was very grateful to have Macaca around.

Well, I generally try to not post while I have actice characters, but I think you did well enough to merit me breaking my habit. I could tell you were fairly new, and through our various fights I began to see that you pretty much had no fear....and that's exactly what you need to gain expierience and knowledge in this game. Well done, and good luck with your next one.

G

Well...I'm trying to be helpful with this char to people, and I don't intend to be a jerk. I hope I didn't come across that way. The thing that I would encourage you to do is find ways to get to the village without using eastern road. In that situation, especially with a cloud giant, the river to blackclaw is a great option with three steps to the trail. Yep...you could get summoned in those three steps, but it isn't as likely.

Anyway, I liked Macaca a lot and I wish you luck with your next endeavor. There is a lot to learn in this game.

Actually for his induction Macaca had to come up with four?
ways to get into the Village without taking the road at all.

The issue is that largely I was willing to take my own propensity
to gamble and turn that into Mac's limited intelligence.

I don't mind getting into situations where survival is unlikely
because it's awesome if I do survive (and even better if I win),
but from an IC perspective, it's just Macaca being a dumb giant.

WTF, for years ragers bullied other people on the Eastern road and now they avoid it at all cost, plus, ask about hidden routes at induction

We have an enemy at the gates, striking the giant, and you start fighting the lich. Who then later comes to the village and with the giant kills me. To Matren, the village is always first, he is a defender.

I suppose that even big, dumb, deformed giants should use their
big, dumb, deformed brains when the head is on the line.

~

Which I know is false.

after he entered eastern and stayed there longer than few seconds he did not have much options in running away.

If he walked around.. donno but probably result would be the same.

Those are nice words to hear. I appreciate the sentiment, but I think you did a good job yourself of being a good villager. It is a hard place to learn the game, but I think at the same point, it makes yhou stronger because you don't rely on certain things that others do. Anyway...good job. Hope you like what comes next!

... Didn't think you'd con-die already! Laughed my ass off at your lastname, but I liked you. Seemed to be standup to your enemies and showed me some respect etc.

Lamanee,
Mac felt that even the smallest of gnomes, as long as they were not
magicians, were worthy of friendship. Thanks.

Seriously, was it just a coincidence?

Here's the thing:

A few years ago some politician used the word to insult some member
of his press-pool. I thought it was hysterical and have since used
it to occasionally make fun of my girlfriend.

What I didn't realize until after I rolled Mac was that this story
was national news and resulted in "Macaca" being named "the most
politically incorrect term of 2006 (or whenever.)" Well, I wasn't
going to delete over this, but would not have been surprised to
get denied at any moment.

But, I guess I was doing something right, because I even got last-
named.

I will try to avoid naming any of my future characters after obscure,
if hilarious, racial epithets, knowingly or unknowingly.

Also, Rob, I hated Lirad until I saw the description, after which
I was hoping you would immort.

>Here's the thing:
>
>A few years ago some politician used the word to insult some
>member
>of his press-pool. I thought it was hysterical and have since
>used
>it to occasionally make fun of my girlfriend.

Actually, this violates naming rules of CF.


NAME NAMES NAMING
Carrion Fields requires Player Character names that are compatible with a
fantasy roleplay environment. The idea is to create an atmosphere that is
free of outside references, and the questions you were asked upon character
generation are intended to guide you in this aspect. Specifically, we do not
allow words from the dictionary ("Killer") or slight variations on them
("Killa"), including slang. Combinations of words ("OrcKiller") are also
forbidden for the same reason. Also, we ask that you do not take names from
historical sources or published works ("Stalin", "Beowulf").

Final judgement is at the discretion of the Immortal staff, and may result
in deletion of the character. Take a few moments to think about your name
before deciding on one during character generation.

I am fully aware of that.

This being said, I would say that a decent percentage of names in CF
have some other meaning. And personally, think that this is a good thing.

For example: Rochefort (a fine character, btw) is a type of world-
famous cheese. I would much rather interact with "Rochefort" than
"Alinagathas" (not a real character)or any of the other cringeworthy
LotR "inspired" names that the game is full of.

Kale is a leafy green.
Demetrius is several notable Greeks.
There is an active leader with a Biblical name.
And these are just off the top of my head, without looking at the
graveyard.

And I only speak one Russian word, so who knows what sort of goofy
things those guys are playing?

The point is that if you're getting worked up about other people's
names in an online text-based RPG you have too much time on your
hands.

Look, I thought Stevers was a silly name, but it certainly didn't
keep me up at night.

~

Sometimes people choose names that sound offensive by an accident. There is no good cure to it. The only suggestion I can propose is to google your name first.

However, when people make such names by purpose, this is actually "deny" (or rename) worthy case.

"Macaca" has very similar sounding in several languages for a primate genus, and, in fact, that word was used to identify blacks as primates. Even we drop any offensive part of that word, it is still an animal and that reason alone is enough to ban such names.
I don't think it will help the game if we will have names like "pig", "BigHorse", etc.
While you can't catch every bad name, I wonder why imms allowed you to get away with the name that is hardly accindental. Or at least make a friendly reminder to player who purposely creates such names.

Macaque

>Sometimes people choose names that sound offensive by an
>accident. There is no good cure to it. The only suggestion I
>can propose is to google your name first.
>
>However, when people make such names by purpose, this is
>actually "deny" (or rename) worthy case.
>
>"Macaca" has very similar sounding in several languages for a
>primate genus, and, in fact, that word was used to identify
>blacks as primates. Even we drop any offensive part of that
>word, it is still an animal and that reason alone is enough to
>ban such names.
>I don't think it will help the game if we will have names like
>"pig", "BigHorse", etc.
>While you can't catch every bad name, I wonder why imms
>allowed you to get away with the name that is hardly
>accindental. Or at least make a friendly reminder to player
>who purposely creates such names.
>

The friendly reminder would be when you roll the character and you are asked "Is this name found in any dictionary or a common slang term?"

You question why Imms "allowed (him) to get away with the name that is hardly accindental (sp)." How are the Imms supposed to know whether this, or any other questionable name, is accidental? Particularly if people are already going to lie when asked the naming questions at character creation?

Imagine if you unknowingly made a character with a name that meant something like "Russian queer" in Mexican slang and at level 51, when you were caballed, had many friends and enemies were brought to RotD and denied for a name violation. Would you complain a little? I think most people would. Even forcing you to change your name at that point would be confusing for all of your allies and enemies, as well as likely piss you off.

I don't know what the whole situation with Macaca was, but hopefully the above can add some grey to the black and white picture you paint.

>You question why Imms "allowed (him) to get away with the name
>that is hardly accindental (sp)." How are the Imms supposed
>to know whether this, or any other questionable name, is
>accidental? Particularly if people are already going to lie
>when asked the naming questions at character creation?

Come on, "Macaca" is not that obscure. It's very easy to catch such names even for an ignorant imm.
We also have "Lhydia" playing for a while and it's exactly the same as if I would name my next character "Marcus" or "Nepenthe".

>Imagine if you unknowingly made a character with a name that
>meant something like "Russian queer" in Mexican slang

If it's obscure or hard to catch, well, let it slide.
But there are too many obvious cases lately.

Even after looking it up halfway through the character's life I
didn't realize that it had a life outside of the George Allen
controversy or in Tunisia.

The fact that it's common anywhere in the world is news to me and,
I would guess, the staff.

It is pretty obscure, but living in Virginia myself, I had heard of it.

Before the Glen Allen thing, I had never heard of it though.

That said, I think you were about 35 and already in Battle before you
entered my radar, so like what Adekar said, probably not going to do
a name change at that point.

G.

I'd heard of Macaque monkeys, but not "Macaca". Same root.

nt

... Macaca doesn't sound funny at all to me. I always thought it to be perfectly fine. But then again, I don't know russian. ^^

n/t

n/t

>We also have "Lhydia" playing for a while and it's exactly the
>same as if I would name my next character "Marcus" or
>"Nepenthe".

You lost me here, was there an imm named Lhydia or something?

Oh, Iktul was played by forum handle Lhydia. Hm, I wasn't aware of that when I made the character, but I'm not enjoying the character anyways so will delete to make you happy. Kinda funny, I remember someone throwing a fit on newbie channel that someone made a character with their forum handle, but they never said what the name was, I'm guessing it was me.

FWIW I had no idea I was taking someone forum handle, haven't played in 5 years and though I did play the same time as Iktul, I don't generally read the officials and don't recall seeing that handle on Dio's. Sorry Iktul if it made you mad.

He's been a talking point of mine since that election.

Wow, talk about disaster.

He was up all the way until that.

Long live Webby Webb.