Ok, so there's cheating dragons

[masterfool]

Lucy,
  What you're arguing is a different point. You are arguing that there should be no rule against such actions. .. I am simply pointing out that there IS a rule against rigging battles and farming for stats.  If you want to argue that there SHOULDN'T be such a rule, that is fine. . . but it currently exists.  Therefore, even your "agreeing to not use potions to invite incoming attacks" is against the current rule.  Why?  Because even though you may hope to win the battle, you yourself admit that you take these actions to increase stats.  You have artificially altered circumstances in order to improve your stats.  If you have to promise not to potion up in order to "invite the incomings" then you admit they would not occur without such promises, or if they did, you'd likely potion up on them (assuming you don't know what your opponent is using and are interested in winning, you would potion up to the maximum possible - or at least what you thought necessary for that battle).

  Fact is, I DO think such a rule is needed, because rigging battles for stat gain provides an inherent advantage. . . the idea should be that you do everything you can to win the battle.  Furthermore, if you'll note carefully that the scenario I posted included not just rigging for the raiding side, but also on defense and assists, the stat gains could be more than nominal.  Furthermore, the "expense" of the action - as opposed to random battles - is greatly reduced.  No potion or equipment costs lead to an unfair balance when compared to people who fight unrigged battles where they must assume their opponent is coming in hot and heavy.

[Lucifer Rising]

Lucy,
  What you're arguing is a different point. You are arguing that there should be no rule against such actions. .. I am simply pointing out that there IS a rule against rigging battles and farming for stats. 

Oh -- okay.  Gotcha.  I agreee.

Fact is, I DO think such a rule is needed, because rigging battles for stat gain provides an inherent advantage. . .

Oh, we were so close, too.  lol.  So you're doing MORE than simply pointing that a rule exists.  . . you're pointing it out, AND you're saying that it's a good rule.   :red wink:Instead of the "good because one dragon is not trying to win" argument, you're going with the "inherent advantage" bit.  I have to admit, that's gloriously unexciting.  If you'd like to remove the bits of game that might confer inherent advantages, then you're removing everything that makes a skill game a skill game.  You're willing to eradicate the scenarios where good players are willing to gamble on their dragon's stat against an otherwise inferior dragon, when the potential payoff is more stats. . .  . yawn.

Anyway, besides arguing that such a rule is arbitrary AND that it disallows otherwise innocent game tactics, I'm going to suggest that the current rule is extremely boring.  As I argued to Trinity a bit earlier, it's prohibits a lot of potentially creative and innovative gameplay.   Nobody really wants Harrison Bergeron Dragons.

[Defractor]

Since this thread has turned into a discussion about farming  , I'll just go with the flow.

> PD2 is an inherently social game.  dragons stand to gain a lot by assisting and being assisted.

It seems to me that the question of what constitutes farming and what is merely cooperative and competitive play cannot be answered without first determining to what extend PD rewards skill vs social networking.

dragons with a larger social network (dragon friends) have a greater chance of getting assistance, and assistance can play a tremendous role in the outcome of the battle. The intended, official dragon networking tool - clans - is not yet available.  As such, players have had to make agreements and communicate outside of the game in ways that are not controlled by it (they would anyways, though perhaps to a lesser extent).  Just as maximizing the stat gain from each turn is possible through climate/elemental bonuses, maximizing stat gain from every minute could be possible through always having someone to assist, or always fighting in long battles, etc. etc.   The former is skill, the latter is networking.

Some of the behavior that allows that 'maximization' of action benefits are in questionable territory, as evidenced by this thread.  no matter your personal take on it, it obviously is not clear enough to be unanimously agreed upon.

Someone with no dragon friends cannot even attempt the type of behavior under discussion (questionable raiding/assisting, DNA tags, etc.), unless they create farm dragons: clearly violating terms of use.  skipping over casual players, on the other hand we have dragons who are highly active socially and are the ones most likely to engage in the "questionable" types of behavior; behavior that could fall under suspicion due to the vague definition of farming provided by the TOU.

As soon as one dragon does anything altruistic in any way, such as any "gentlemanly" behavior, it raises the bar for all other dragons who do not gain that advantage.  It creates an arms race of "unfair advantages".  If you don't also find a way to maximize your gains, you can't keep up.  And so, you could find some dragon friends to do some real-life sparring with.  With enough friends, it would be easy to find someone to provide a nice long battle, with lots of gains for all involved.  Cheating? Smart playing? Necessary to keep up with other dragons?

Or perhaps, a casual player might be okay with logging in and using turns every day to give their friend more gold, because they are friends and it doesn't take much effort.  Even if they don't explicitly hide/retrieve gold in response to specific attackers, the friend would still be at an advantage because they are in communication.  If you have several casual friends like that, are you farming?  Is the casual player also violating terms of use because they don't care if their friend gets their gold?  With a hazy definition of farming, anyone who is not playing highly competitively is at risk of the dungeon, or worse. 

The out of game communication can make a huge difference in a dragon's well-being, but PD is quite clearly a game that tries to reward networking (clans!) and a game that tries to limit out-of-game factors (the limited effect that teeth are allowed to have on gameplay).  The rules need to be clearer about what kinds of cooperation are allowed, so we don't end up hurting any casual players in the attempt to make the top X% more fair.

...

I definitely rambled quit a bit, but the bolded part is what I wanted to say.  Casual players might just be playing in order to help friends, but are still a part of the game.  If we want to forbid that style of gameplay, then the rules need to be much much clearer. 

[Jack Vellum]

Farming - It is also forbidden to use any other willing dragons to unfairly raise your game stats. A farm account is any account that exists solely to benefit another in any way, whether it is your own multiple account or that of a friend. This does not include other unwilling players that you simply treat as farms by attacking them many times. We will try our best to tell the difference. However, it is also forbidden for two players to cooperate to increase the stats of one of them by rigging battles or by any other unusual means, whether or not one of the accounts is solely for farming. In these cases, both players may face warnings or resets.

               ^{*Lucy you can actually tell people where quotes are coming from it makes things easier to follow.} 

Anyway as I seem to be reading this differently to many other people so let me break it down as I see it and see where we end up.

Farming - It is also forbidden to use any other willing dragons to unfairly raise your game stats.

Stupid line. What is unfair? What is willing? By playing the game aren't you a willing participant? I'm not saying you like being raided just that you'll put up with it to play.

...it is also forbidden for two players to cooperate to increase the stats of one of them by rigging battles or by any other unusual means, whether or not one of the accounts is solely for farming...

Isn't the key word here rigging? For example if both dragons decide not to use potions then I don't think anything is rigged. Both dragons simply have stats 25% lower but since it is both then the outcome shouldn't be altered. I would have though rigging would imply such acts as selling equipment just before a battle starts (reverse dumping if you will) or taking potions that will have a negative effect on your dragon such as Strange green liquid all by itself.) The other think I find interesting about this portion of the ToU is the word unusual. DNA tags: Not unusual, Tempting incomings with no potion policies, not unusual

and lastly

...it is also forbidden for two players to cooperate to increase the stats of one of them by rigging battles or by any other unusual means, whether or not one of the accounts is solely for farming...

What if two players cooperate to increase both of their stats? Which is the case in all these "Raid circles" and Raid prolonging measures. Forgive me if I'm wrong but wouldn't the only stat increase that could occur to one dragon be treasure gain?

_{...Or having a very Slow dragon since the opponent won't get stats when the slow dragon misses? Hmmmmmm
and just incase Lucy gets smart the last three quotes are fragments of the first.}

[Charmed]

               ^{*Lucy you can actually tell people where quotes are coming from it makes things easier to follow.} 

God I'm glad someone pointed that out... I thought it was just me who spend too much time reading backwards when reading Lucy's posts (I do try to read your posts, but you do make it hard sometimes ).

Anyway... back on topic.

[masterfool]

Lucy,
  In my latest post, yes, i argued that such rules are necessary to keep the game fair and level.

Jack,
  I think what we need is more clarification on that rule.  I have never said that I thought it was clear enough.

Allow me to elaborate:
  1)  I consider it rigging any time you make a decision to not fight a "planned" battle in the manner you would a "random" battle  . . . thus making a "gentlemens agreement" to not use potions or equipment is "rigging" - particularly if you would normally use those things in a random battle.  Obviously, there are more extreme versions of "rigging" that you noted . . . but I think that the "gentlemens agreement" - while they may not affect how the outcome would be - are "rigging" the battle none the less, as it is specifically altering the battle to save the gold of the competitors.

  2)  I agree that the line with "unfair" and "willing" is unclear.  But I think the INTENT is clear:  You can't have an agreement with someone to attack you every day 4 times though they do nothing else in the game. . . or that that player builds up gold, keeps it in potions, and then sells all the potions when you come to raid.  Or that a player uses potions and equipment to attempt to win every battle, except against your dragon. Those are some examples of "unfair" practices by "willing" dragons.

  3)  You seem to think that the line "increase the stats of one of them" reads "increase the stats of ONLY one of them" .. . I do not think that way.  Again, more clarity is needed.  I won't argue that.  Perhaps I am reading more into the matter than the devs intend, and if so, then that's fine.  I, however, think that the should say "increase the stats of ANY of them" . . . and I think that's how the devs intend it to read.

[bard]

I'm not so bright as the rest of you,but I can't help feeling that in a community of such brilliant and creative players,that the wording was deliberately vague enough to allow for the devs to deal with situations that were never forseen until they arise.I think that MF hit the nail on the head when he pointed out that the clear intent of an action is probably more important than the letter of the law.

[Lucifer Rising]

The point is that the rules don't give any guidelines to problem cases.  I listed a number of them.  The further problem is the intent is NOT clear.  If it was, then they could "clearly" state it.

MF's example of "x attacking y four times in one day" is a pd1 problem.  Because of pd2's glicko system, such actions have no bearing on the Greatest Fighter board whatsoever.  If the problem is stat gain, I STILL don't see the problem.  Despite all his verbiage, MF has still not explained why he thinks this is somehow bad.  He has just listed a bunch of arbitrary rules listing what he thinks farming is, none of which have any rational basis that I can see.

Personally, I say LET "x attack y" four times a day, on that condition that it is for the mutual advantage of both dragons.  (I.e., one of them cannot be a fake dragon.")  Personally, I don't much care what other trainers do.  If they find a strategy that works for them, good for them.  It's not the BEST strategy -- mine is -- but to me it just seems like sour grapes that people complain because some trainers manage to succeed while working outside the narrowly prescribed limits arbitrarily set forth by a sanctimonious few.  I think it's better to be concerned with what you do to your own dragon rather than what other people do to theirs.  It's part of why I have such a wide tolerance for activities that many others consider "farming."

Ultimately, the more rules you create -- espeically rules which fail to present a clear and present advantage to the overall game  -- the more you stifle creativity, strategy, and innovation. 

EDIT:  I should probably mention that I actually have a lot of faith in the devs, and my hunch is that they have a very liberal interpretation of the ToS.  I'm addressing my points to the forum in general, however, than to the devs, in the hopes for a consensus.

[masterfool]

Lucy,
  Why is it bad?  Simply because it allows some players to benefit where most others can not.  Specifically "rigging" battles by agreeing to not use potions and attacking each other regularly for assists and stat gain artificially inflate the leaderboards (in the case of assists, which DO count towards AA calcs) and unfairly increase stats without regularly associated costs (i.e. potions and equipment).  It is in my opinion that this is against the current rules, and should remain against the rules.

Ultimately, and maybe this is where others will likely disagree with me, while I love the social aspects of this game, it is my opinion that one should play ones dragon to win every battle.  And specifically rigging battles, agreeing to not use potions/equipment, and regular attacking between friends for the purpose of stat gain go against what I feel is the spirit of the game.  One should strive, IMO, to individually better ones dragon at all times.  And the practices I cite do not do that.

Now, as I said, that is my opinion.  I obviously don't speak for the devs, or for anyone else.  But I feel that the more we move away from individual trainers into a world where "he with the most friends wins" and where individual trainers can't succeed (due to inflated stats, or artificially altered gold levels, etc.) then the game loses its appeal. 

To me, PD has been one of the FEW games on FB that never forced you to spam your friends, and never forced you to invite hundreds of people to your FB profile, and basically let you do your own thing, and still be successful.  If this turns into a game where only teams have a true chance, then I'll be more than a little upset.

[neellocm]

Ultimately, and maybe this is where others will likely disagree with me, while I love the social aspects of this game, it is my opinion that one should play ones dragon to win every battle.

Using this logic MF.. any person who doesn't potion up for any battle for any reason should be thrown into the dungeon?  Any part time player who doesn't check their dragon every 4 hours to assure that they're potioned up should be thrown in the dungeon? 
Any collecter, who uses their turns on getting gold to increase their incomings even though they know they can't really defend it should be thrown into the dungeon?
Any dragon who chooses to do a large bloat which  greatly ruins their chances at defending  themselves for a while (or maybe forever) should be thrown into the dungeon? 
Any dragon who tries to ruin their glicko by losing battles so that they can get the luck or skill achievement should be thrown into the dungeon?


They're not TRYING to win every battle.. so they must be cheating?

[Jack Vellum]

At this point I'd just like to say I love PD. It allows for such a wide variation of interpretations to situations and makes for a very colourful environment. I've actually decided that a clearer ToU would take some of that colour out of the game and as a result the game would be fair less interesting. It's a good thing that people interpret "The word of the Dev's" in different ways as long as we realise what our interpretations are guided by our own moral character and are not necessarily the correct interpretation for everybody.

Any dragon who chooses to do a large bloat which  greatly ruins their chances at defending  themselves for a while (or maybe forever) should be thrown into the dungeon? 

Just you try it Missy! 

[neellocm]

Just you try it Missy! 

I'd be in there with you!

[Av]

And Lenny, I don't think that's what MF means at all and I think you know that.

He's actually been very specific:

And the practices I cite do not do that.

[masterfool]

Av, thank you.  I appreciate that SOMEONE realizes my arguments are not even close to the slippery slope that neellocm describes.

However, for the record, let me set it straight.  I think there are many things that a trainer can do to LEGITIMATELY try to win, without having to be tethered to the game.  I check my dragon 2, MAYBE 3 times a day. . . do incomings get by that I don't see?  Damn straight they do.  But do I potion up for them when I see them?  Yes.  Even if it's a friend I know is just attacking for kicks and giggles.

Are there some battles I don't potion up for?  yes.  Those I think I have a legitimate chance of winning without the potions (these are few and far between . . . and sometimes i'll potion up to a lesser extent - using flasks rather than bottles).

The point is, there are many perfectly fair reasons a trainer can choose to not potion up . . . or not check every hour . . . or even to bloat (eventually, you're doing it to get the best stats possible INDIVIDUALLY, without specifically colluding with other players to artificially increase your other stats).

As for gold to increase incoming?  Nothing against that.  It's legitimate, so long as you TRY to defend the incomings that you notice.  NOBODY can beat every dragon that attacks them.  Sometimes the RNG just won't allow it.  But there is a difference between collecting gold to attract RANDOM incomings, and collecting gold, then bloating, then telling all your friends to attack you to improve your stats and those of your other friend, who will be assisting.  And by the way, you won't be using any equipment or potions on those battles, except maybe a Sand potion to increase the length of the battles.

Collect gold specifically so your friends get more out of hitting you on your rigged battles?  THEN you should be sent to the dungeon as a farm dragon.

For the record, I AM against intentionally ruining glicko so you can get the "defeat a dragon with 1000 more glicko" achievement . . . but I'm not going to go so far as to suggest that it should be a punishable offense . . . I understand that some people play to get achievements, and while it may be distasteful to me, I won't argue too hard against it.

The point is, I play my dragon for MY benefit, not the benefit of others.  I legitimately try to win every battle I'm involved in, when I notice it.  I don't go out of my way to obsess over it (anymore), but I DO try to stick to the idea that my dragon should TRY to win on his own, without having to have "gentlemens agreements" or "attack rings" or "rigged battles" of any sort.

I believe that those things - along with some of the other examples I've cited - are against the spirit, and quite possibly the letter, of the ToS.

[Fiddler]

I'm not so bright as the rest of you,but I can't help feeling that in a community of such brilliant and creative players,that the wording was deliberately vague enough to allow for the devs to deal with situations that were never forseen until they arise.I think that MF hit the nail on the head when he pointed out that the clear intent of an action is probably more important than the letter of the law.

Agreed, I think the devs have put this here so we can all be happy that something will be done finally about whatever it is that is hiding behind the scene that we don't all see, I am sure they get many complaints it is not for us to tell them what is cheating and what is not.

Lucy I think Defractor has it right here when he says

As soon as one dragon does anything altruistic in any way, such as any "gentlemanly" behavior, it raises the bar for all other dragons who do not gain that advantage.  It creates an arms race of "unfair advantages".  If you don't also find a way to maximize your gains, you can't keep up.  And so, you could find some dragon friends to do some real-life sparring with.  With enough friends, it would be easy to find someone to provide a nice long battle, with lots of gains for all involved.  Cheating? Smart playing? Necessary to keep up with other dragons?

your way suits you and only you, I sit with MF here when I say that "rigging" battles to further your glicko or whatever stat is in question at the time being is questionable behaviour in my eyes. It just doesn't seem like an honourable way to make it to the top. That's my opinion and I'm not here to say it should be a rule or it shouldn't be a rule.