Blatent cheating in PvP- c'mon man.

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO

Savos_Saren wrote: »

Edirt_seliv wrote: »

Savos_Saren wrote: »

Edirt_seliv wrote: »

Cres wrote: »

Mr_Walker wrote: »

Beardimus wrote: »

In your opinion. You might think the campaigns aren't worth it, but for those that care the nefarious behavior that happens ruins the feel of the game.

Technically spycraft and sabotage are part of war (think WW2, the French Resistance, and the Enigma code machine for starters), so these spys/saboteurs are just making it more realistic.

Plus, lag will get you in the end anyway. It gets everyone....

Except in real war, if found those spies are dead.

And in real war, I can't set up a trebuchet in 3 seconds. Nor can I carry 30 of them in my backpack. But alas, some concessions are made for the fun of video games, and the abilty to troll your allies is a god given liberty.

I don't think you understand the word "ally". If you're sabotaging a faction- you're not their ally. You're just exploiting the open faction campaign to help your other faction.

I'd argue that "Sabotage" is contextual. Because you see, from my perspective, I am aiding them. Perhaps I understand that our faction is better off not controling x keep because it will create unwanted retaliation.

Or perhaps I brokered a deal that I would hinder x seige and in turn x guild would give back our scroll.

In mind, I'm a faction hero. Welcome to open world gaming, where not every players experience aligns with yours.

Yeah... that doesn't sound like a load of ***, right?

"Hey, I'll sabotage Sej so that you can take it.... if you'll give me a whole scroll for it. Oh, and of course, my faction still wants to win the campaign... so our collusion at some point will only hinder your faction. Deal?"

Sounds legit.

Actually this isn't too far fetched. Back in the days of meaningful campaigns AD and DC brokered a deal to gate camp EP due to their constant night capping and 48m raids on EU.

AD held emp and 1/2 the map whilst dc held the other half and the EP scrolls. DC would win and AD would enjoy Emp. After this lasted for a week until the end of the campaign EP didn't night cap the map again for some time.

zyk

Turning another player's siege for the purpose of disrupting the team you are currently playing for is obviously griefing. The mental contortions it must take to believe otherwise are interesting.

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO

zyk wrote: »

Turning another player's siege for the purpose of disrupting the team you are currently playing for is obviously griefing. The mental contortions it must take to believe otherwise are interesting.

Congrats on proving everyone else's point. Griefing isn't the same as cheating. Case closed

zyk

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

zyk wrote: »

Turning another player's siege for the purpose of disrupting the team you are currently playing for is obviously griefing. The mental contortions it must take to believe otherwise are interesting.

Congrats on proving everyone else's point. Griefing isn't the same as cheating. Case closed

That would only be proof if griefing and cheating were mutually exclusive. One can grief and cheat at the same time.

Edirt_seliv

Savos_Saren wrote: »

Edirt_seliv wrote: »

Savos_Saren wrote: »

Edirt_seliv wrote: »

Cres wrote: »

Mr_Walker wrote: »

Beardimus wrote: »

In your opinion. You might think the campaigns aren't worth it, but for those that care the nefarious behavior that happens ruins the feel of the game.

Technically spycraft and sabotage are part of war (think WW2, the French Resistance, and the Enigma code machine for starters), so these spys/saboteurs are just making it more realistic.

Plus, lag will get you in the end anyway. It gets everyone....

Except in real war, if found those spies are dead.

And in real war, I can't set up a trebuchet in 3 seconds. Nor can I carry 30 of them in my backpack. But alas, some concessions are made for the fun of video games, and the abilty to troll your allies is a god given liberty.

I don't think you understand the word "ally". If you're sabotaging a faction- you're not their ally. You're just exploiting the open faction campaign to help your other faction.

I'd argue that "Sabotage" is contextual. Because you see, from my perspective, I am aiding them. Perhaps I understand that our faction is better off not controling x keep because it will create unwanted retaliation.

Or perhaps I brokered a deal that I would hinder x siege and in turn x guild would give back our scroll.

In mind, I'm a faction hero. Welcome to open world gaming, where not every players experience aligns with yours.

Yeah... that doesn't sound like a load of ***, right?

"Hey, I'll sabotage Sej so that you can take it.... if you'll give me a whole scroll for it. Oh, and of course, my faction still wants to win the campaign... so our collusion at some point will only hinder your faction. Deal?"

Sounds legit.

First and foremost, the point is, You nor I are the authority on what is and isn't a load of shxt, and even for ZoS to deem something as purposefully malicious means they have to assume motive, which is not something they can do.

Secondly, you might be surprised by the politics of Cyrodiil that get played by some of the large and influential guilds. It's less frequent these days as less and less guild care about the campaign result (and rightfully so). But In my experience alone, I have been part of scroll deals, emp deals, faction truces etc, and to be honest, the politics game added a whole new dimension of fun, so it's not something that i think we should be avoiding purposefully.

Savos_Saren

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

zyk wrote: »

Turning another player's siege for the purpose of disrupting the team you are currently playing for is obviously griefing. The mental contortions it must take to believe otherwise are interesting.

Congrats on proving everyone else's point. Griefing isn't the same as cheating. Case closed

Again- it's absolutely ironic how this whole situation happened while some familiar EP guys (that may or may not have been part of the Dracarys group) were actively sieging the keep while AD defended it... and here you are defending the actions of an "innocent" AD guy that was just "griefing" his fellow faction members.

It's just... so... unbelievably convenient… right? It's just... I dunno… like soooooooo inconceivable that someone from another alliance might be turning siege around to assist their actual alliance. Right?

Why would someone come to a conclusion like that???

Savos_Saren

Edirt_seliv wrote: »

Savos_Saren wrote: »

Edirt_seliv wrote: »

Savos_Saren wrote: »

Edirt_seliv wrote: »

Cres wrote: »

Mr_Walker wrote: »

Beardimus wrote: »

In your opinion. You might think the campaigns aren't worth it, but for those that care the nefarious behavior that happens ruins the feel of the game.

Technically spycraft and sabotage are part of war (think WW2, the French Resistance, and the Enigma code machine for starters), so these spys/saboteurs are just making it more realistic.

Plus, lag will get you in the end anyway. It gets everyone....

Except in real war, if found those spies are dead.

And in real war, I can't set up a trebuchet in 3 seconds. Nor can I carry 30 of them in my backpack. But alas, some concessions are made for the fun of video games, and the abilty to troll your allies is a god given liberty.

I don't think you understand the word "ally". If you're sabotaging a faction- you're not their ally. You're just exploiting the open faction campaign to help your other faction.

I'd argue that "Sabotage" is contextual. Because you see, from my perspective, I am aiding them. Perhaps I understand that our faction is better off not controling x keep because it will create unwanted retaliation.

Or perhaps I brokered a deal that I would hinder x seige and in turn x guild would give back our scroll.

In mind, I'm a faction hero. Welcome to open world gaming, where not every players experience aligns with yours.

Yeah... that doesn't sound like a load of ***, right?

"Hey, I'll sabotage Sej so that you can take it.... if you'll give me a whole scroll for it. Oh, and of course, my faction still wants to win the campaign... so our collusion at some point will only hinder your faction. Deal?"

Sounds legit.

First and foremost, the point is, nor you or any other player are the authority on what is and isn't a load of shxt, and even for zos to deem something as purposefully malicious, it means they have to assume motive, which is not a fair thing to do.

Secondly, you might be surprised by the politics of cyrodiil that get played by some of the large and influential guilds. It's less frequent these days as less and less guild care about the campaign result (and rightfully so). But In my experience alone, I have been part of scroll deals, emp deals, faction truces, you name it. And to be honest, the politics game added a whole new dimension of fun, so it's not something that i think we should be avoiding purposefully.

Wow. The way you describe such intricacies of politics just makes me think of the word "cheater". I'm trying to think of any other way to put it... but I can't. Like... if you make bargains with the enemy so that you benefit from it while leveraging the success of your "allies"... that's straight up treason (or in this video game world: "cheating").

Edirt_seliv

Savos_Saren wrote: »

It's just... so... unbelievably convenient… right?

Convenient or not, one thing it unequivocally isn't, is cheating.

zyk

Savos, you're basically just feeding these guys the lulz they play for at this point.

Dojohoda

Sounds like some goofy stuff. He was probably laughing his head off in real life; maybe even fell out of his chair.

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO

Savos_Saren wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

zyk wrote: »

Turning another player's siege for the purpose of disrupting the team you are currently playing for is obviously griefing. The mental contortions it must take to believe otherwise are interesting.

Congrats on proving everyone else's point. Griefing isn't the same as cheating. Case closed

Again- it's absolutely ironic how this whole situation happened while some familiar EP guys (that may or may not have been part of the Dracarys group) were actively sieging the keep while AD defended it... and here you are defending the actions of an "innocent" AD guy that was just "griefing" his fellow faction members.

It's just... so... unbelievably convenient… right? It's just... I dunno… like soooooooo inconceivable that someone from another alliance might be turning siege around to assist their actual alliance. Right?

Why would someone come to a conclusion like that???

I've never said that they were turning siege around to assist their alliance. Someone else said that I was just replying about a situation on EU to give another perspective. I've told you the only time I remember seeing you at sej was when 3 of us were getting ap on random chars so idk who you refer to as a Drac group. Coincidently this was also after a 24m ad group had just PvD'd Arrius uncontested because there was so few EP online and AD held all scrolls iirc it's been a few days now. That's why I gave my example

ATomiX96

zyk wrote: »

Turning another player's siege for the purpose of disrupting the team you are currently playing for is obviously griefing. The mental contortions it must take to believe otherwise are interesting.

yes its griefing, not cheating... op should learn to distinguish those two terms.

Datthaw

Spying, sabotage, deception... all valid tactics of war since.... war started

Davadin

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Savos_Saren wrote: »

(because I understand the tactics behind making factions go after each other) posts.

Maybe it was strategically important to lose sej so that EP focused on DC again rather than retaliating for the zerg PvDing that AD had just performed.

Pact has too Nord-like mindset.

we retaliate. we destroy. we die glorious death.

strategy does not exist.

Mayrael

Ok if you think that there is nothing to spy on then there are 2 possibilities:
1. You don't know how to spy.
2. You just pretend so nothing changes.

Though never done it I can give you some tips:
1. You can see your faction sieges on keeps before keep is UA, so you can give exact nbers and locations of incoming attacks before keeps are going to be UA, no scouting needed, 2 people (1 per enemy faction) can scout all keeps and outposts without even going out from starting zone.
2. Movement between groups very often is coordinated on zone chat, especially when it goes to PUGs, thus you can predict offensive and defensive movements and inform about it your guildies. E.g. you see on zone that someone spotted your friends otw to certain keep, so they change their target to strike where it's not going to be defended.

Just 2 simple examples. I'm sure there will be someone who will say "bUt WhY? CyROdiIL iS nOt iMpoRtaNt", for some that's true, but if this would be the case for everyone there wouldn't be so much threads about gratulations of win etc.

Edirt_seliv

Mayrael wrote: »

Ok if you think that there is nothing to spy on then there are 2 possibilities:
1. You don't know how to spy.
2. You just pretend so nothing changes.

Though never done it I can give you some tips:
1. You can see your faction sieges on keeps before keep is UA, so you can give exact nbers and locations of incoming attacks before keeps are going to be UA, no scouting needed, 2 people (1 per enemy faction) can scout all keeps and outposts without even going out from starting zone.
2. Movement between groups very often is coordinated on zone chat, especially when it goes to PUGs, thus you can predict offensive and defensive movements and inform about it your guildies. E.g. you see on zone that someone spotted your friends otw to certain keep, so they change their target to strike where it's not going to be defended.

Just 2 simple examples. I'm sure there will be someone who will say "bUt WhY? CyROdiIL iS nOt iMpoRtaNt", for some that's true, but if this would be the case for everyone there wouldn't be so much threads about gratulations of win etc.

You know that the 'congratulations on winning' threads are troll threads to take digs at other factions and guilds right?

Most of them are a long standing tradition between vet players.