zenith Wrote:If someone disrespects you through words, it is your right in this game to put them in the hospital. But people go overboard.
There are a lot of reasons to hold a grudge. But never letting it go is where the problem lies. Both sides need to come to a resolution or we get these hospitalization wars that everyone gets sucked up into.
What does the attacker have to lose in this situation? Nothing really. They can attack at will and keep someone from playing. The person doing the hospitalizing can keep doing it until the weaker player quits or gets banned for inappropriate mail/forum posts/name changes. The attacker wants an email from the weaker player, as it's gives them more reason to continue and "justification" when sending me a mail.
What does the weaker player have to GAIN in this situation? More hospital minutes and a forced retirement at the hands of another player is pretty much it. They are basically stuck. The more they mail, the more the attacker has an excuse to keep things up. Since they probably won't be able to play anymore, they may as well go out with a bang. In fact, some players do this to force the attacker to waste energy on purpose, because they know they aren't going to be playing much anymore.
I am not justifying my past behavior of "meddling" by making two sides come to an agreement, but it's intent was to avoid situations like this. Both sides want to play the game. But ever since rule 18 was brought in, the small disputes have snowballed.
I'm thinking at the moment I am going to make it where you need FULL energy to have the option to hospitalize just like the berzerk option. However, the actual COST will still be what it is now... 1/3rd energy rounded up. No one will be paying any more for a hospitalization, but you will need to be fully rested to have the option. One hospitalization will still give you 2/3rds your energy rounded down left.
You're missing some options/points here.
1) If neither side wants to negotiate, it is perfectly acceptable for hospitalizations to continue at will. Like it or not, this is how it SHOULD be. Referring to my past - sometimes it took an apology on the public forums even when the public knew that clan did nothing wrong, but that it's members were suffering and it had to end the war. If the leader(s) are unwilling to negotiate, that is their lack of compassion for their members. Afterall it is just a game. Or perhaps their members said "never surrender!"; therefore, they are not discouraged by the hospitalizations, and the leader(s) are just doing as their members wish.
2) You are assuming that those in the gang cannot leave the gang. Members are free to come and go from gangs. This was often the sought-after goal in my previous online gaming experience where it was setup as a hierarchy system. You would take out the person's armory day after day after wiping out months' worth of work in hopes they would leave the clan (even join yours maybe). Yeah sometimes the player just quit instead of leaving...unfortunately it does and will happen. If you try to prevent it though, you'll just lose more players, as this game went from 125,000 players to just
45,000 due to new rules and regulations. Part of the reason people like this game is it has a variety of things to do, and there are limited restrictions.
The only time then that administrative action should even be considered is when the other side cannot be civil if either the surrendering gang does a) surrender and comply to the terms, b) surrenders but the attacker does not stop after being given very beneficial terms or c) a person merely "guilty by association" leaves and makes this clear he/she does not intend to rejoin and/or participate in the war.
Barring no attempted compromise, war on.
edit: this only applies to gangs warring
