Re: Time for a poll. (The subject is abuse)
 

Ich, thank you.

WOW, someone has to be a real turd to do this. They obviously promised to trade forgings of value and then actually sent slave collars. (I forged one, once. Couldn't figure out why such an apparently valueless item was on the list, tried it, and am still wondering.)

I cannot rate this nefarious trick as an exploit. I define an exploit as utilizing some deficiency in the programming that permits something that was totally unintended by the game designers. This slave collar trade is a seperate category.

Re: Time for a poll. (The subject is abuse)
 

No, the slave collar trick has nothing to do with a trade.

You just send them unannounced. Tons of them. Enough to fill his lab and make him throw away anything he forged that turn. Wasting mage time and gems.

The deficiency in programming is twofold, restricted lab space and trades coming before your own forging.

Re: Time for a poll. (The subject is abuse)
 

Actually, I dont see how copying Bogus' commands may pass for a game quirk. There are some program bugs that become a feature, but then there are bugs. You cannot say that hex-editing a 2h file is a feature, can you? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif
I could've agreed that having a casting mage retreat after wrathful skies is a clever move too, but there's one notable exception to that rule. Wrathful skies + sacrificial fodder is something I'd call a feature; Wrathful skies + AQ or Seraph is unbalanced and thus its bug, imho.

Re: Time for a poll. (The subject is abuse)
 

I dont understand this i think. What is the problem with sallying into a neighborhood province?. Isnt that exactly what is supposed to do?

Re: Time for a poll. (The subject is abuse)
 

It's the "sneaking out from a besieged castle and with non-stealthy troops to boot" bug, found in the shortlist under movement related issues.

Re: Time for a poll. (The subject is abuse)
 

Dominions has no concept of trading items. You can only send stuff to another party. Given that somebody would have to waste gems and mage time on forging items to send them away, the only possibility I see where this "exploit" would be feasible would be when an extremely important item, for example the Chalice, would get lost in the game and people would be racing to forge it. Somebody might get the idea to fill his opponent's lab with items so that he can't forge it. But then he would either need to have a full lab of junk himself so far, or he would need to draw similarly low quality magic items from his commanders, like const 0 magic weapons, sanguine dowsing rods etc.

See, this is exactly why I don't like overzealous hot topics like this. How is Wrathful skies combined with shock immunity unbalanced or a bug? It's quite an obvious combo, and can be achieved with any caster and a ring of tamed lightning.

Re: Time for a poll. (The subject is abuse)
 

Now I really get it. I was totally unaware that you could send things to someone else without both parties agreeing to a trade. Now that I think about it, you can send gems and gold as a gift, so items must also be on the list.

Re: Time for a poll. (The subject is abuse)
 

Ok. That one i knew. I thought he was talking about something different.

Re: Time for a poll. (The subject is abuse)
 

I agree with you. Wrath of sky + shock inmunity is not unbalanced, actually it is *the* way to play wrath of sky in my opinion. It's like casting foul vapors when you have an army of poison inmune vine units, or casting heat from hell with Abysia, or casting darkness/rigor mortis with an army of undeads.

Casting the enchant, and retiring, sounds different though. The devs have said, afaik, that the enchant *should* finish when the mage retires or die. So it is exploiting a thing that does not work as intended.

Re: Time for a poll. (The subject is abuse)
 

I pretty much agree with everything your saying.

However, on the flip side, one of my pet peeves are players that say that "anything could go" but then don't really mean it.

Like QM:
"If it is in the game it is fair play!" but then goes on to say: "Well... except for that MoD thingy... that is totally an exploit!"

It's totally hypocritical to say that you think the game should be played as is and then give exceptions.

And yes... those aren't exact quotes - but the impression they give is the same.

Re: Time for a poll. (The subject is abuse)
 

You dont get it. Its not shock immunity combined with wrathful skies. Its AQ combined with a mage scripted to cast WS and retreat. See? Now there's just a very hard to kill SC on the battlefield, and no way to end Wrathful Skies.
Now if it was AQ herself who has cast the spell, she'd get lots of fatique and probably die. Had the mage stayed, well, there's a fat chance you'd get him too. But with AQ and a retreating mage its a win-win, unless your enemy gets a lucky soulslay or something. Too cheap.

Re: Time for a poll. (The subject is abuse)
 

Maybe I am inherently evil. All of this stuff sounds like strategy to me.

Re: Time for a poll. (The subject is abuse)
 

Maybe you just use all this stuff yourself against more maneered players, and thus enjoy it.

Re: Time for a poll. (The subject is abuse)
 

Then the problem is retreating mages and staying battlefields. The AQ has nothign to do with it, the problem is that the WS *should* end when the mage leaves, as it is mentioned in the bug shortlist.

Re: Time for a poll. (The subject is abuse)
 

Moving 3 provinces your movement 1 troops through "move+patrol" bug is "strategy" for you?

Re: Time for a poll. (The subject is abuse)
 

Yeah, I've got nothing against AQ and Wrathful Skies.
The retreating mage is a bit tacky, because the spell is supposed to end when he leaves.

Bottom line, you can either kill the AQ or not. If you can, you lose more troops from Wrath, if not you'd lose anyway.
Sure it's harder, but not impossible. You're not going to kill a kitted out AQ with chaff troops anyway and if you're up against an AQ and other high end Air mages your thugs, mages and SC killers better have shock resistance.

MoD is practically impossible to stop once the mage retreats. That's the difference.

Re: Time for a poll. (The subject is abuse)
 

Your assumption might be correct except the fact I have never used any of these tactics against the AI or other players.

My apologies, my poll options must be filtered because I did not see that one listed. Looks like a bug to me, and I would think it would be decided by the host/players if there would be repercussions for using it.

Re: Time for a poll. (The subject is abuse)
 

It's not in the poll, but it is mentioned in the thread later (as Bogus, or sneaking out of a siege with non-sneaking troops for example) I thought you were talking about the whole thread, not about the poll.


However, if you are only talking about the poll, i have to ask then if editing the 2h file is strategy for you http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/rolleyes.gif

Re: Time for a poll. (The subject is abuse)
 

Imagine that you had mages who'd eventually get AQ. With skies, they just died before they managed to penetrate her MR. And you're not guaranteed to have air indies to forge rings of tamed lightning for everyone, nor to have a trade partned who'll equip your mages.

Re: Time for a poll. (The subject is abuse)
 

I can't be bothered to read this entire thread because I wouldn't get a refund for the time lost being your shoulder to cry on http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif.

As far as your "edit to argue" goes, if you have read the whole thread, you know my position on that.

Re: Time for a poll. (The subject is abuse)
 

I don't think most people who take that position are hypocritical, any more than I think it's hypocritical to host a game and allow some tactics but not others. I think the basis of this is "does this break the game?". We can disagree as to what satisfies that condition, but its a very different discussion than what's an "exploit" in an "unintended" game mechanic. The position to ban the MoD exploit has nothing to do with it being unintended, it has to do with the opinion that it really breaks the game. Heck, most of the MP games I've joined lately have banned Arcane Nexus for the same reason. The difference is MoD is pretty much the only universally frowned on tactic so should probably be assumed to be banned unless something is said.

Re: Time for a poll. (The subject is abuse)
 

You didnt need to read the entire thread. The OP mention it in the third post.

I guess that 2 post is enough to have a good point of view of the problem http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/rolleyes.gif

Re: Time for a poll. (The subject is abuse)
 

Yup.

Re: Time for a poll. (The subject is abuse)
 

Well, don't forget it may happen via collusion of more than one opponent as well. For example, if the leader of an MP game puts up the Forge global, and nobody is in a position to Dispel it, I would completely try to make an alliance of the other players who would each send a dozen items. It's a way to deny the one player use of forging, and it seems like a useful and valid tactic to me. And it is sort of self-balancing: if it's a one on one situation, you would have to commit X% of your lab/forging to deny the opponent the same percent of his capability.

Sill

Re: Time for a poll. (The subject is abuse)
 

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/Sick.gif

Re: Time for a poll. (The subject is abuse)
 

My original quote:
There is a huge difference between saying anytime a player uses a tactic they are being somehow dishonest or cheating, versus recommending that hosts use specific house rules if they want their games to be more fun.

Re: Time for a poll. (The subject is abuse)
 

I think this discussion cant reach a conclusion, as there are innate difference between minmaxers and players that have a more roleplaying perspective.

As on one side sailing out of besieged castles, so the sieger does not notice it, or sending your enemy useless trinkets, so that he stops forging makes perfect sense to minmaxers because they get a benefit from this action, even if it defies common sense and is at best a very cheesy solution. While the rp fraction considers this cheating.

So the only solution is the devs either fixing the bugs, or declare them as features.

Re: Time for a poll. (The subject is abuse)
 

Who would you place in the "sailing out of besieged castles" is ok camp? I don't believe anyone has said that it should be a feature.

I don't consider myself part of either "faction" but one thing that annoys me about the RP faction is the way they create new rules rather than finding counters to the issue they are facing.

Roleplayers surround themselves with self made rules such as:

"if it would not work in real life, you should not be allowed to do it in a video game"

"Its lame because there are only few counters to it, and even if I could counter it, the other player can do this, this and this"

When instead, players should be figuring out ways to counter the moves. Once they figure out how, then they can stick it to the perpetrator all day. If the players who want to nerf everything were to take all the time they have spent complaining about cheesy moves on this forum and use it towards testing counters, there would be a lot less crying and a lot more laughing at the player using the things that are being complained about.

Another thing to. Just because these guys list these things as exploits does not make them roleplayers. Just because you create artificial rules for the game does not make you a roleplayer. A roleplayer assumes the role of his pretender, it does not mean he plays inefficiently. I would argue that a min/maxer can be a roleplayer and vise versa.

Roleplayer is being used here as an excuse as to why a person should not have to look for counters. It is used as a justification for behavior that should not be rewarded in which the player webs himself in self made rules on how the game should or should not be played. The only rules that should matter are the rules built into the game. And if the developers see fit to change those rules due to bugs, or potential exploits, that should be what changes the game environment, not the opinion of a self proclaimed roleplayer.

Re: Time for a poll. (The subject is abuse)
 

Actually, if you're *literally* sailing out of the besieged castle, I think that *should* be allowed. Any castle in a coastal province is probably going to be built on the coast and the besieging army will probably not be able to blockade the harbor too. (Unless they also have a besieging navy, but that's probably too complex to implement.) Flying and sneaking ditto. (Again, rules for midair interception and patrolling to uncover the departing sneakers are probably too complex to make it into Dom3. But if the devs ever change their mind about making a Dom4...)

But if you can use order-changing exploits to assign those same kinds of moves to troops that don't belong with them, then that's a bug.

Re: Time for a poll. (The subject is abuse)
 

What is a exploit ? It's using something that doesn't work as intended. Therefore, if something you use doesn't work as intended (it could be important or not, game breaking or not, counterable or not, usable by all or none... it doesn't matter), you are exploiting the game mechanics. That is the definition of cheating.

The problem would then be : "how do you know that this or this is intended ?". Basically, asking the devs what they think of that or that mechanism when you have a problem with it. Then until they fix the problem, it is put on a bug list. Once again, the definition of a bug is "something that is not working as intended". Whether the change is important or not, usable by all or none, game breaking or not, counterable or therefore does not matter.

In the current case, the problem comes from the community that has accepted some exploits as "normal occurences" and do everything in their power so their vision of the game to remain the same, instead of respecting the dev's wishes and playing their game. When a possible large issue comes, those people that have come to rely on those exploits generalize their situations and conveniently forget that the reason why exploits exists isn't because this or that combo is game-breaking, but because after seeing all aspects that players found about a spell, the devs decided that some of them were not what the game should be.

The last problem is the bug list : for some, it's to show that it's not to be exploited, and others, it's a tool that is used to show what combos should be abused before the next patch comes. Again, the same communities clash : it's not about min-maxer, not roleplaying. It's about what you believe is the limit of what should be used in a game. Some believe that everything that currently is in the game is 'fair game', and the other one believes that everything on the bug list should be treated as if it were already out of the game. You can still be a min-maxer or a roleplayer in either case. The problem, and the clash comes when the first community uses one thing on the bug list on a player from the second community, because it gives him an advantage that he cannot countered.

That is another question that I think would have given pretty interesting results too, but before this thread was made (now everyone is worked up, no one's fault !) :
"The bug list is :
A) stuff that will be removed from the game, it's fine to use it,
B) stuff that will be removed from the game, it's fine to use it the one with low importance (everything not of a major or medium status),
C) stuff that will be removed from the game, it's should be considered as if they were our of the game already.
D) Obi-wan kenobi."

Re: Time for a poll. (The subject is abuse)
 

Okay, now that's more or less complete bull.

First, Wrathful Skies isn't really powerful. It hits random squares on the battlefield. For it to have a "good" effect, the enemy army has to be quite large and consist of not too powerful units. Best when you can easily hold them at bay, e.g. in a castle storming when you can hold the entrance with blockers. In short, an enemy army that is subject to suffer non-trivial losses from WS is one that any SC would eat for breakfast, anyway.

Second, the air queen hardly needs a supporting mage that retreats from the battlefield. Give her an air booster and a couple of gems and she can cast it without breaking a sweat. A5, 2 gems, that means 3 extra gems for reducing fatigue off a 200 fatigue spell. But even without extra gems: If you build SCs like I do, then you'll make sure that their reinvigoration is higher than their encumberance so that they can fight until the end of time instead of getting overwhelmed due to fatigue at some point. Since the AQs have zero base encumberance that's quite easy to do. So, if the AQ can cast Wrathful Skies itself without the need for a retreating support mage, where is the problem? That a good, fully decked out SC is hard to beat in time? That's nothing new.

Re: Time for a poll. (The subject is abuse)
 

Exploiting just means taking advantage of... and taking advantage of the game mechanics is what you are doing every time you attempt any strategy. Defining cheating as *not using* the game mechanics might be better (i.e., hacking to add gems from nowhere).

Re: Time for a poll. (The subject is abuse)
 

Exploiting :
1. The act of utilizing something for any purpose. In this case, exploit is a synonym for use.
2. The act of utilizing something in an unjust, cruel or selfish manner for one's own advantage.

I used exploit with its second meaning, and in that case it means cheating. Sorry if it wasn't clear enough. I would have used "used" if I meant just using the game mechanics.

EDIT :
Defining cheating as "not using the game mechanics" is wrong in my opinion. Because a bug often is a game mechanic that can currently be used. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/confused.gif

Re: Time for a poll. (The subject is abuse)
 

Biggest waste of gems and mage time I ever heard of. I'm not saying that this isn't possible, just that it's impractical. You waste gems and mage time to donate magic items to your enemy, however useless those items might be. And you'd have to keep this up for the subsequent turns, too. So, let's see... Lowest gem count for forging an item is 5 gems. Magic lab can hold what, 50 items? So you'd need to send up to 250 gems worth of magic items, per turn, to your enemy. If I'd be that enemy, I'd die from laughter. Gem generating globals, dwarven hammers, clams, Forge of the ancient all have just one goal: To save/generate more gems than your enemies can. If you want to sacrifice as many gems as that for such a dubious plan, then your enemy doesn't have to do anything because you're playing into his hands by digging your own grave instead of, uh, the crazy idea of saving those gems that go into his free items, to override his enchantment or alchemize them to astral gems and dispel it?

Re: Time for a poll. (The subject is abuse)
 

Well said Hadrian. I completely agree. I am on the role paying side. Game (for me) is about having fun, trying new strategies, discovering items/spells/sites. Ideally if all players in a game have this mentality, the game also can have a nice competitive feel where everyone is in the race. However, it can be shock if you are playing this way but then you face a minmaxer with some nigh unstoppable maneuver. Nothing necessarily wrong with that, in the sense as one person said, everyone has access to the same game. I can see how over time, once a player has done all the exploring, they can evolve to min max. I am still in the innocent, rosy-eyed RP phase.

Re: Time for a poll. (The subject is abuse)
 

So let me get this straight. You guys are roleplayers because you don't play to win, and people who play to win are not roleplayers?

Re: Time for a poll. (The subject is abuse)
 

No, that is not what I said.

Maybe this will make it easier for you to understand -
I am still learning the game and I like to try new things to see what they do even though they may not be the best way to win. I'd rather play with people doing the same so we all have a decent chance of winning.

Once I have tried more things I probably will be more focused on strategies proven to win.

Re: Time for a poll. (The subject is abuse)
 

Where does roleplaying play into all of this?

Re: Time for a poll. (The subject is abuse)
 

I think we have pretty much reached the very root of the issue. I (and I think many of the other people in this thread), would not call making use of a bug 'cheating', per se. I would draw a firm line between someone using some external method to alter the game files (i.e., hacking), and someone simply using the interface in possibly unintended ways. The latter can certainly be undesirable behavior in some cases, but it really is a whole different issue from cheating.

Re: Time for a poll. (The subject is abuse)
 

Hacking is a wrong that goes beyond the responsibility of the Devs to make right. Exploiting a known bug only occurs because the bug is there to be exploited in the first place. That's not to say that the Devs should be blamed, they aren't gods-they just create them http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif and Dominions already has an amazingly (expecially considering that it's apparently such a near-infinite hydra of a beast) tight code. It's definitely the lesser of two evils though. I'd compare hacking to a mortal sin, whereas exploitation is simply invoking a social gaffe.

Re: Time for a poll. (The subject is abuse)
 

Roleplaying has nothing to do with playing to win or not. You can play to win and roleplay/play thematic, and you can play thematic/roleplay and be a complete moron strategically.

The two camps are not roleplayers vs non-roleplayers. The 2 factions are min-maxers vs non-minmaxers. A mix-maxer is happy to play with Mists of Deceipt, for example, even if he knows it is bugged and broken, just becouse it is a good adventage. A non-mixmaxer is not willing to do so, and preffer that spell to be fixed, or removing it from game. A min-maxer ussually acept that everything that is in the game, is allowed (like MoD, or copying Bogus orders, or moving 3 provinces with move+patrol), and that the game is balanced becouse everybody can (or should) know what those bugs (or features) are, so everybody can use them. Those who dont know that twiceborn on a demon will grant them inmortality are not of their business.

The guys who carry that a step further are cheaters. Which mean they hack the 2h file and whatever (things that are not inside the game, intended or not). I havent read no one here saying that part is right. Although i beleieve that some people would consider it "fun", just that they wont admit they'll do. Heck, there are THOUSANDS of people who use aim-bots in counterstrike and what not... cheating is part of the nature of the gaming community.

Re: Time for a poll. (The subject is abuse)
 

What I meant with a little more text :

EDIT :
The reason I'm from the second community is :
A game is not my game. It's something that comes out of the imagination of someone or a group of people, and that they decide to put at our disposal to let us have fun (and for them to make money). I therefore think it is a show of respect for them to play the game as they intend it to be. Some of what min-maxing finds out may not have been predicted, that's the reason people should ask devs whether a "feature" that seems unintended is a bug or not.

Once the decision is made (there goes definition of a bug again), if it is decided to be a bug, I will therefore not use it I know of it, to respect the game creator's wish about the game until it's corrected.
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...es/biggrin.gif

Re: Time for a poll. (The subject is abuse)
 

I think the easiest solution is the hosts declaring what is ok, perhaps based on what we have said, but still a matter of host policy. If a host would like MoD to be usable in its current form in one of his games (perhaps with Caelum set up as central player and defender of a large empire) it would be silly if players joined and later complained because of something I have said. Each setup game should be the property of the host and the players involved.

Re: Time for a poll. (The subject is abuse)
 

So you are not roleplayers?

I don't know what to say. It sounds like you guys have created your own rules for the game, and you expect other people to have the manners to play by those rules, even if it means losing. I am guessing you guys would eat a loss or quit a game if it came down to doing that or finding a counter to something that is not a part of your personal ruleset.

Re: Time for a poll. (The subject is abuse)
 

There are two kinds of people in the world. Those who divide the world into two kinds of people and those who don't.

You can find a counter to just about anything. For example the counter to Norfleet was having score graphs turned on.

Re: Time for a poll. (The subject is abuse)
 

Foodstamp, it's time for you to quit baiting the newer people, because that's mainly what your last few posts have been. Or it at least looks that way at a casual glance.

This whole RP/non-RP division is completely ridiculous and a red herring for the purposes of this discussion and making unsupported claims and statements about people being such, therefore having to conform to some sort of arbitrary ruleset or whatever is pure bull droppings.

From where I stand, both the "anything but hacking 2h files goes" crowd and the "house rules" side have points in their favor with regard to specific arguments, but neither side can claim being 100% correct.

Most of the stuff in the buglist is not something that can be turned around and used to wring an unintended advantage. Some things can be and those can be divided into categories according to just how they act.

• One example being the reverse communion issue, which acts like a feature and gives more options for all players who can access it (meaning anyone with astral magic).
• Another one is the army movement bug set, where stratmove 1 units can be made to march 10 provinces in one turn with the right commander (e.g. a horror) or more commonly 2 or 3. This is not intended and never has been or else the units would have greater stratmove. The sneaking out of siege bug is another one where Johan has gone on record saying it is a bug that should not be there.
• Then there's the Mists of Deception + BF Enchantment combo, which again has been confirmed to not work as it should.
• Demons with Twiceborn is another unintended consequence of something in the code, something that should work differently than it currently does

Out of that above list of examples, the first one is an equal opportunity exploit that does not give any kind of overwhelming instakill advantage and is widely available to various nations. The last one is basically specific to Lanka and can be used on a few unique blood summons and some Mictlan specific summons, so while it's still playing a crooked game to avoid losing units that would otherwise die (at least the second time around), but has its drawbacks and is limited.

MoD+DBFE is an instakill advantage when used by defender and should not work as it does, which at least in my mind places it in the category of being a dishonest tactic and playing a crooked game, therefore cheating. The same can be said of the movement bugs and I suppose on some level that I should have just sent those reports to Johan by PM and just put them in the list as "Movement 1 and Movement 2, reported by PM". Doesn't matter that the movement bugs are available to everyone equally, using them is playing a dishonest, crooked game in my book at least. I'd qualify that as cheating straight out, despite some of the rather torturous and hairsplitting definitions of cheating I've seen in this thread.

With that said, if somebody wants to play a game with house rules, fine, put as much restrictions as you like and use an honor system. Fine. If you enter a general game with few (if any) house rules, it's generally pointless to whine about some tactic being used (like he Wrathful Skies/AQ combo mentioned earlier) and in such games the only such complaints I'd take seriously are the MoD+DBFE and movement bug issues for the reasons given above.

It also seems that most MP games can eliminate at least one of these points of contention by just using a mod that removes Mists of Deception from the game entirely. That'll leave only its abusers as the complainers.

Re: Time for a poll. (The subject is abuse)
 

The collusion angle of lab filling does present a whole new aspect to the ploy. I followed the thread (and many others) under the basic assumption that (occasionally) there are players who utilize tactics that the vast majority of players do not consider valid or in the spirit the developers intended because of various reasons. There is general, but not universal, consensus on almost all of these actions.


But when I read that two or more players may unite to fill an opponents lab presents a whole new perspective.

To be honest, I cannot even decide if it makes the ploy more valid or less valid. Previously I thought it would require a significent effort from a single player to forge adequate number of slave collars to effectively fill an opponents lab and block new forgings. But to learn that 2, 3 or 4 players would think that this is a good move and thus each would contribute an easily manageable quantity of items to fill one players lab is entirely different.

Re: Time for a poll. (The subject is abuse)
 

I wouldn't want to play in a game where lab-filling is considered a valid tactic.

I mean, what the heck is that? How does it possibly make sense in the reality of the game? Your lab is a fixed size which can only handle so many items, and you've got morons working on your docks, who clutter up your lab with so much junk that when your mage steps in to craft an item, he trips over them and drops all his gems and they spill down the drain some other moron installed in the floor?

It's just abuse of the mechanics of the game's interface, in this case the fact that there's no interface implemented so nations can refuse 'gifts' of items from other nations. It's got nothing to do with mages and spells and forging and research or any kind of fun stuff like that.

Please don't go and assume I'm in the 'Wrathful Skies + SR100% is an exploit' crowd though (though I think that crowd is pretty small). I just want stuff to make sense in the context of the game. I don't think I'm in a minority in that respect either.

Re: Time for a poll. (The subject is abuse)
 

Yep, bassically is that. I expect other people to have manners.

And yes, i would rather quit the game than needing to resort to move 3 province my heavy infantry through a bug or whatever any other thing that it is not working as intended.

In case you didnt notice, i already said that my grief with VotD has completelly dissappeared since Jonathan O has said that it is working as intended. I no longer see it as exploiting something that is buggy (becouse it is not, it works as the devs want it to work), therefore i dont care if you min-max it and use 20x per turn. I would not play with you if you keep using strat move 3 through move+patrol or Mist of Deception or any other of the tactics that do not work as intended.

Re: Time for a poll. (The subject is abuse)
 

See, I can pull things out of context too.

I apologize if it seemed like baiting. But I wanted to make a point that "roleplayer" is not a synonym for someone who does not min/max.

With their replies they have agreed that playing by house rules does not make someone a roleplayer.

That's all I am going to add to this, and with a little bit of reading, you will see the baiting went both ways.