"Well if I report what do I get for it?" is what ppl think. Plus you keep your 10 reports to report your friends when needed.
Fwiw, the only time I almost ran out of reports was when the Steam release flooded us with ppl following advertisements and not realizing yet this is more like chess than Call of Duty -- and we only had five max at the time. (Next day edit: Correction, I did run out a few times after we got ten. For a few days, I got sick and tired of all the new "inappropriate usernames," thus I just plugged part of a word into the name search list and started reporting ten at a time per day. Erg. People.) Also, I can't say I'm really for giving extra items to the higher-ranked. They usually have no problem with items anyway. Maybe some gold. Maybe one slice of pizza per day above some mark *if* you also played ranked that day. There was also a discussion many moons ago about players giving sportsmanship rewards to benefit the losing players who are good for the community -- an idea Jon said he liked.
There are in-game rules for it and there are penalties for it. People have been banned for it. It took me a while but I did get a couple of people banned for doing it hundreds of times.
BM, in the interest of Lawful Evil players, would you mind clarifying that playing to lose on purpose is as bad as (or even worse than) resigning early? Thank you kindly. (edited irrelevant stuff out, along with the admitted offender's name) ~sigh~ The conversation continued for awhile, unfortunately. (Yes, I was getting pretty agitated. I've dealt with so many two-faced people who back-pedal once cornered on actual important issues, that such now get under my skin even on trivial issues. After all, if you're going to be double-tongued and double-minded on small stuff, why would I think you wouldn't be on more serious issues, too, since it's apparently just your way of life? Ugh. People.)
I don't think you can make a blanket statement covering all bases of "losing intentionally is against the rules." It really needs to be a case-by-case basis. If someone is doing it just to lower their Elo then it is something that should be against the rules. But if they are doing it just to try weird builds and try to better understand the game I don't see it as overly problematic if it isn't a super long term thing.
So long as there is a (perceived) benefit to having a low ELO, people will find ways to lower their ELO no mater what the rules say. If we can find a way to change the system and eliminate any benefit from deliberately lowering your ELO, most of the problems will go away. (We'll still have the griefers, but they're easier to spot.)
I use weird builds all the time and always will, doesn't mean I am trying to lose matches in the short term or the long term. Just means I don't enjoy playing some of more popular builds due to various reasons. Plus someone has to use all the content everyone else ignores!
Isn't that what the whole conversation basically said? I view trying weird builds to be a completely different beast from intentionally losing, and it sounded like that was everyone else's take, too, other than the one tongue-tied troll; I even found an old forum post by non-dev-Flax asking community input on a party he built for fun albeit with the knowledge it probably wouldn't do well in ranked especially while he worked out the kinks -- and everyone said, *pssh* as long as you're trying to play and not trying to lose, you're fine. ... Man. ... Even a new winning build generally goes through its new losing stage. I mean, I can build an intentionally losing party and play to the end. Even missing some of the items and relying on some okay substitutes, I've reliably killed myself via round 2, and at least once killed myself via round 1. (Only in casual to amusingly prove a point, though. No way I'd take that monstrosity into ranked. What a jerk I'd be.)
Yes, I'm just reiterating the point. I'd just report someone if they are "throwing games" even if it is a "new/weird build" -- let the admins decide if it is justified or not.
There are so many grey areas in this issue and it is too opinion based to be fair. We want players to have freedom to play Card Hunter their own way, so they have fun, but then we have people who seem to get excited if they get a chance to narc or tattletale on someone who they think isn't playing the way they assume they should? What if I quit cause I have to take a dump? Should I be reported? Or should I make you wait and get reported for stalling? Considering half the high rankers won't even acknowledge your chat messages, why would I even waste time trying to tell them before quitting? Not to mention, presently or in the past, there are days when I swear I will fight like 5-6 people in a row that are exploiting known balance issues in MP and I get that 7th guy in a row who does it, if I choose to quit the game after the first round cause of the exploit, I should have that right without the fear of someone narc'ing on me. The devs/mods always says "Don't do anything in Card Hunter you don't find fun." and I have been known to exercise that right under the above conditions after showing extreme patience. Which rule trumps which? Does that mean I can report people I think are "exploiting known balance issues" & "let the admins decide if it is justified or not"? If you are going to condone one aspect of "but it boils down to this: it degrades the play experience for your opponent." why not condone them all? Where is that dev rule or thread about not exploiting known balance issues? Because that sure as hell degrades the player experience a lot more then me quitting a match cause I suddenly have to take a dump or deciding to go watch a movie since a game I pay money for is annoying me.
Flax tried that before with his whole "anti-meta protest" ... but he luckily got shot down. Not sure if he ever apologized for it though, but his actions were totally in the wrong.
Why would he have to apologize for expecting people to be considerate to new and casual players and punish people who exploit loopholes? Kind of like real life? Oh wait, never mind this is the internet! If he tried, then he has gained even more of my respect now.
From your context I guessed he tried to get people to stop using balance exploits and folks shot it down and he then ranted about it. I am a long time CH player but new on the forums so sounds like it predates me being on here. Is the thread still floating around?
cyco, however gray you imagine this issue to be, here are some black-and-white facts that have been discussed, including things already outlined by Jon: If you bow out of a game for the purpose of lowering rating, it's reportable. If life calls, and you must bow out of a game, it's understandable. If you reasonably believe you cannot win a match and bow out, it's understandable. When a person explicitly admits to lowering rating (or needlessly prolonging games out of spite/trolling/whatever) on purpose, there is no guesswork, there is no gray area; it's just plain ol' reportable. From how Jon's two initial posts in this thread read, bowing out of league games without reason #2 or #3 is also reportable. (Why would someone do this since one can't lower one's rating this way? "Giving" random opponents chests is a commonly admitted reason. Reportable.) In my experience, gray only really occurs when people are silent or dishonest. Silence: Whether or not your opponent responds, if you communicate what's going on, then the human factor can get worked in, and people can judge actions and patterns, and if it ever came down to bans, the patterns with statements would be on record, yay. Dishonesty: People reap what they sow, and dishonesty eventually comes back to bite -- often in the same place, but not always, which is also fine in the long run. I for one am glad that the CH community works on quite a lot of an honor system, although if system changes come which tangibly help BM's vision of generally clean fun for the community and income without fraud/hassle, then cool, I'm all for it.
