Warlord Ethics

[The Lady Shael]

I'm at work, and I'm INCREDIBLY bored. Thus, I am making this topic.

Ethics is a topic that seems to keep re-surfacing, especially with many new members coming in and having no idea what is socially acceptable in-game and what isn't. We've slowly developed an unwritten set of "guidelines" that people should follow if they are to be considered a friend.

Remember, these are just "ethics", not rules. We could prevent online attacking from happening or take out all the offensive leader missions if we really didn't want them happening. So personally I feel that getting angry at someone for "breaking a guideline" is a little silly; everyone's ethics are different.

So let's discuss this and see where people stand. The purpose of this topic is not to sit down and make an official list of "Warlord Ethical Guidelines" that everyone must follow. There will be no such list. Everyone is different and will believe different things than others. The purpose of this topic is so players can see that not everyone stands on the same side on all issues. Maybe discuss and see which actions are more socially acceptable than others.

So here's the topics:
-Online attacking
-Murder/Poison/Steal
-Other Offensive Leader missions (you can name them individually if you want)
-Sacking
-Market Thefting
-When does a friendly land grab go too far?
-Kills
-any others you can think of

[thomaskreisman]

what is market thieving?

[The Lady Shael]

Market thefting is buying items from someone on the market and then stealing from them right after. You get the goods and the cash and the seller is left with nothing.

Here's my take.

Online attacking
Don't like it. I think everyone should definitely avoid doing it to others, but I think some people get a little too angry when it happens to them. I don't think the effects are THAT devastating, and I think people only get that angry because it's supposed to be frowned upon.

Murder/Poison/Steal
Agree with most, only use these on your enemies in cases of war. But again, I think people also blow these actions out of proportion. These missions were added to the game for a reason. They weren't put under a label that says, "Use with caution!" They are supposed to add challenge to the game, because this game isn't supposed to be a smooth ride. Maybe 1-3 missions I'd blow off, but more than that and I'd have a word with the person.

Sacking Capturing
This seems to be a touchy subject and people seem to be divided. Capturing is undesirable because obviously you lose leaders to your opponent, which can really hurt. But if people agree that capturing is okay, it's actually a way of passing leaders around (and the only way too). I was taught that capturing is acceptable, but I try not to sack too much.

Market Thefting
This may or may not be an issue if we revert back to a different market system, but for the most part I think market thefting is a dirty move. I think most agree, and yet people do it anyway.

Land grabs
I try not to take a large percentage of people's land, and I always stop before they go under 10,000 acres.

Kills
Should only be done when the victim really deserves it, never just because the killer "felt like it".

[thomaskreisman]

Market thefting is buying items from someone on the market and then stealing from them right after. You get the goods and the cash and the seller is left with nothing.

Ahh cool, I'll have to try that on some random wraith player, let me go put there names in a hat.........stand by

[CobyCopper]

Market thefting is buying items from someone on the market and then stealing from them right after. You get the goods and the cash and the seller is left with nothing.

Here's my take.

Online attacking
Don't like it. I think everyone should definitely avoid doing it to others, but I think some people get a little too angry when it happens to them. I don't think the effects are THAT devastating, and I think people only get that angry because it's supposed to be frowned upon.

Murder/Poison/Steal
Agree with most, only use these on your enemies in cases of war. But again, I think people also blow these actions out of proportion. These missions were added to the game for a reason. They weren't put under a label that says, "Use with caution!" They are supposed to add challenge to the game, because this game isn't supposed to be a smooth ride. Maybe 1-3 missions I'd blow off, but more than that and I'd have a word with the person.

Sacking
This seems to be a touchy subject and people seem to be divided. Sacking is undesirable because obviously you lose leaders to your opponent, which can really hurt. But if people agree that sacking is okay, it's actually a way of passing leaders around (and the only way too). I was taught that  sacking is acceptable, but I try not to sack too much.

Market Thefting
This may or may not be an issue if we revert back to a different market system, but for the most part I think market thefting is a dirty move. I think most agree, and yet people do it anyway.

Land grabs
I try not to take a large percentage of people's land, and I always stop before they go under 10,000 acres.

Kills
Should only be done when the victim really deserves it, never just because the killer "felt like it".

That's capturing, not sacking....




Online attacking
It's annoying, it messes up runs, and should be practiced with caution. However, it does give defender some distinct advantages, so I can't say it should never happen.

Murder/Poison/Steal
Murdering gets annoying--it kills leaders and troops of course. However, it's necessary for take-downs.
Poisioning is just an act of war, really. Destroys food and cash, so it's purely offensive, as the turns are somewhat "wasted". Also the only way to destroy food en masse.
Stealing is annoying--however it's helping the attacker and hurting the defender. It's a third as offensive as poisioning, in my opinion.

Sacking
Sacking while attacking with troops is very offensive. If someone starts sacking me, odds are I'd want to murder them back.

Market Thefting
Market Thefting is definitely offensive, though necessary for some takedowns on Reg.

Land grabs
Land grabbing is fine with me--I don't have an all-around defense usually. Still, gets on your nerves if someone constantly takes you down to a fraction the land you had before. Then again, it always brings a smile to my face when some idiot grabs too much, then I see "You find ________ (#__) attempting to open an attack opportunity!". Oh well... :P

Kills
Usually wrong. On the other hand, good way to deal with someone for a few runs. In Regular, I think it's uncalled for. Takedowns are a better use of turns, instead of just killing outright.

[Shadow]

Here's my take.

Online attacking
Done at the right moment it can be devestating. Something to be frowned upon, but it has a place when harsh retal is necessary. I don't like it, but I have used it before.

Murder/Poison/Steal
Have a place in balancing the ability of one person to run away with the game. A necessity, annoying at times but definitely not something to consider removing.

Sacking
This seems to be a touchy subject and people seem to be divided. Sacking is undesirable because obviously you lose leaders to your opponent, which can really hurt. But if people agree that sacking is okay, it's actually a way of passing leaders around (and the only way too). I was taught that  sacking is acceptable, but I try not to sack too much.

Market Thefting
New market makes it way too easy. It is supposed to be hard, and the old market makes it that way. Definietly a cause for reverting to the older code.

Land grabs
There is usually a threshold that people stop at, on turbo atm it' about 10k. The guideline is usually obvious.

Kills
Annoying and wasteful unless the target has been asking for it.

[Shade]

especially with many new members coming in and having no idea what is socially acceptable in-game and what isn't. We've slowly developed an unwritten set of "guidelines" that people should follow if they are to be considered a friend.

A note to said new players: When in doubt, do the opposite of whatever Shade is doing.

[Firetooth]

especially with many new members coming in and having no idea what is socially acceptable in-game and what isn't. We've slowly developed an unwritten set of "guidelines" that people should follow if they are to be considered a friend.

A note to said new players: When in doubt, do the opposite of whatever Shade is doing.

for once, I agree 100% with Shade :D

[The Lady Shael]

Whoops, yes, capturing, not sacking.

[The Obliterator]

I personally dont have a clue why we have them at all.
We are vermin,vermin dont have ethics.

[Shadow]

speak for yourself, vermin ^_^

[The Lady Shael]

Actually I think Oblit has a point. Again, to quote one of the emperors of old: "This is Redwall:Warlords, not Redwall:Happy Pony Raising". If I still played, I actually wouldn't care if no one followed these guidelines at all (assuming everyone agrees to abolish the ethics of course, not just me). Over the years people have been whining and complaining about being hurt more and more, leading to these "ethics". People could've cared less about this stuff in the old days. Except maybe killing, of course.

[The Obliterator]

that makes more sense to me than all these rules and complaining and whining on the forums.

[Firetooth]

that makes more sense to me than all these rules and complaining and whining on the forums.

lol, agreed, reminds me of old WHINE and crackers...no I didnt get rid of me ole' matey

though to get rid of ALL guidelines (etc. legal to flame, constant clan hopping) wouldn't be good so we do need some "guidelines" and if noobs do crazy things they're killed and bye bye possible player

[The Obliterator]

If no-one had any ethics everyone would clan hop and so everyone would have that advantage