Battlefield spell + retreating?

[Gandalf Parker]

Isnt that a fallacy to define the split that way?
Those in favor and those against?

This forum is continually full of people learning the game. And many of the MP games include people just getting into MP. So while it might be true that the majority of the vocals are against it, I think that would be one side vs the many people who are unaware of it. And therein lies the discussion.

While I am not against someone saying something like "its generally known that is an exploit", that would be different than something like saying "you violated an unspoken rule" and trying to declare cheating or something. If the person running the game does not specify it as a rule, or does not have a link to something like "the standard rules in the games I run", then I wouldnt be big on unspoken rules. I cant think of any that I would consider default.

But then again Im not big on defaults in general. I think the mp games are getting too standardized just to create bragging rights, and are ignoring many of the games most interesting settings.

[JimMorrison]

Sorry Gandalf, if there was anything improper about that last post.

Judging by the number of items on the list that have cyan Dev text next to them, the amount of time it has been on the list, and my recollection of comments that KO made in the last thread I remember about MoD - it was all but written in neon. If it's not, I can only apologize for the misrepresentation.


In any case, Sum1 beat me to it. Since majority rules, those of us who are vocally against it, who greatly outnumber you, K, hereby claim the silent ones as supporters of our position, stealing them from you as their silence clearly shows that they disagreed with you co-opting their opinions.

7/37 game threads specifically ban the move, 0/37 specifically state that it is acceptable. How can you possibly claim that as devastating evidence that everyone who can't be arsed to post here, supports you?

This is fun. I like how when you talk circles around a lawyer (or law student), they continue trying to think that you are the one standing still.

[Gandalf Parker]

You points may be correct.
But I know that there are things on the lists that the devs consider important but the time consideration tends to decide it more. If it comes to many little fun things or one big unfun thing than the big thing can get unhappily set back. It doesnt make it not important.

On your other points, I was unaware that this had been discussed in the games thread. That does make a difference.

[Twan]

How have you counted the games using my MoD fix ?

I think if games like the current mega one and 2 others use modding just to change this spell (and it's the *only* spell which get its effects changed in the whole spell list) it show people are very reluctant to see the vanilla version used in MP.

[Gandalf Parker]

Good point. But I dont remember it coming up on my blitz server. So this would be something applicable to the larger longer running games?

On the other hand, are those games IRC driven? The IRC crowd tends to be an opinion group on its own.

[thejeff]

Your blitz games tend to be around 4 players, right?

I'd guess a lot of them are decided before the serious end-game strategies come into play.

[Gandalf Parker]

true. Do the other servers have rules or mods about it?
Velusion? Llamabeast? lch?

[K]

JimMorrison said:
7/37 game threads specifically ban the move, 0/37 specifically state that it is acceptable. How can you possibly claim that as devastating evidence that everyone who can't be arsed to post here, supports you?

This is fun. I like how when you talk circles around a lawyer (or law student), they continue trying to think that you are the one standing still.

Since the position of "nerf battlefield spells and MoD" is a change from the baseline rules, that puts you in the position of meeting the burden of proving that your position is valid.

Considering that I've dismantled all your arguments and provided some proof (though not conclusive proof) means that I won this argument around four pages ago. You neither met your logical burden nor provided any proof. In a sense, I actually won this argument twice.

I don't have to prove that a majority support my position. The mere fact that there is no proof that a majority do support you is enough to defeat your proposition. The result of no explicit rules to the contrary is to support using the baseline rules, either explicitly or implicitly.

At this point you are stuck with the Conceptual Balance guys and the "nerf all gem items" guys: a recognizable minority whose position is understandable but completely unsupportable. It is the position of: "the game doesn't support my play style, so everyone should support a change that will."

[AdmiralZhao]

This thread makes much more sense if you assume that K is a time traveler.

It was probably a future-K who wrote this:

2.1 It it considered a bug by the devs? Yes, it does not work as they intended. The board moderator Gandalf Parker considers it a major bug, which is why it is red-listed in the Bug forum.

and it was probably some past-K who just wrote the above post about burden of proof. The above post doesn't make any sense in light of the bug status of MoD + Retreat, but since this was written by past-version of K, he isn't aware of that.


Now back to the _Time Traveler's Wife_ ...

[K]

AdmiralZhao said:
This thread makes much more sense if you assume that K is a time traveler.

It was probably a future-K who wrote this:

and it was probably some past-K who just wrote the above post about burden of proof. The above post doesn't make any sense in light of the bug status of MoD + Retreat, but since this was written by past-version of K, he isn't aware of that.


Now back to the _Time Traveler's Wife_ ...

Just because the devs consider it a bug doesn't mean that it adversely affects game balance and should become a rule people should follow. In fact, I consider it as an improvement to game balance because it reduces the importance of SCs and thugs.

The burden of proof is on you to show that people should follow this rule. I've given an affirmative defense (playstyles of MP players) and have dismantled all your arguments (see previous posts). Either would have worked.