[Discuss] Theoretical realistic messaging

[Robert Croson, Jr]

On 2 May 2006 at 13:43, Justin Pope wrote:

> To be clear, I don't think chatting about general strategy is a
> problem. Sharing scoutings, talking about which region you'll be
> attacking next, gathering international allies, sending orders - those
> seem to me to be abuses of the message system.

That's a pretty fine line. Saying "We're attacking to the east" is OK, but "We're 
attacking this region on this date" is bad? Splitting hairs to determine what is 
good and what is bad is asking for problems.

And I still fail to see how not using the game's message system is considering 
abusing the messaging system. Provide a message system that does what the 
players want, and they will use it. Make it difficult to use, counterintuitive, 
arcane, etc., and they won't use it. If they don't use it, then all that hard work 
to make it act "real" is wasted.

> > Would you be so kind as to provide a link to the web page that provides this
> > rule? I would probably even settle for a web page that hints that this could be
> > frowned upon. So far, I haven't seen it on the official site, or on the Wiki.
> 
> There have been discussions on the topic of cheating several times
> over the years.

No doubt. But I can hardly believe that new players are expected to scour four 
years worth of discussion list logs to determine what is and is not considered 
cheating.

> It boils down to a player or players (not characters,
> that's the whole point of the game) gaining an unfair advantage over
> others. The game provides certain features and limitations universally
> - those are the "rules". By circumventing them, you (the player) have
> now gained an OOC advantage over those who follow the rules. That's
> cheating.

Using e-mail/IRC/IM can hardly be considered unfair. Anyone who wants to do 
this, can.

It's like having a realm full of people that can reliably log in one hour prior to 
the turn change, every time. Is is unfair that they can do this, while their enemy 
consists of TLs who can only log in at random times throught the 12 hour turn 
period?

> I'm sorry I can't find the details right now - I'm at work right now,
> behind a pretty strict proxy.
> 
> > The real costs of implementing this system would far outweigh any small bit of
> > "realism" that might be gained.
> 
> As I said later on, I agree with you on this. I don't think it's worth
> whatever benefit it might have.


-- 
ARCOM Inc. 440.639.9500  http://www.arcm.com
---Excellence In Technical Communications---