Empty Emblems.

Nullified suggestions are shown here. These are the denied changes.
User avatar
Haelstrom
Bomb Poring
Bomb Poring
Posts: 257
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 2:49 pm
Location: Indiana.
Contact:

Empty Emblems.

Post by Haelstrom »

Been noticing of late, a certain guild I won't name out of courtesy has been going emblem-less a lot. This hurts both defensive and offensive guilds all over, because it makes WoE (which is already chaotic) even more so, and while it really isn't all that effective a tactic, it just seems in poor tastes.

My suggestion is to have a new rule, or perhaps some kind of in-game feature to counter this, as I think most any guild except those that already do this can understand where I'm coming from.

So, things I think should be discouraged or flat out restricted:
  • 100% transparent/empty emblems.
  • Ridiculously small emblems to circumvent the above (i.e. "haha, my emblem is a 1 pixel black dot, it's okay! :3")
  • 100% duplicate emblems (i.e. "hey, let's make our emblem look just like DA KNIGHTZ guild's, so they think we're them! o3o huhr huhr huhr") Obviously, recolors or significant changes with the same basic premise would be okay, but ones that are so similar that it's clear they're an attempt to cause confusion mid-WoE. I can see people trying to make a duplicate emblem and going "THEY'RE COPYING US" as a means of faux-attack, so seniority would take priority here to mitigate that.
Why?

I'm all for strategy. But this is clear as day distasteful, and something we just don't need in WoE, FE or SE. It doesn't help anyone (those defending or those attacking) except the guild doing it, and at that, doesn't really even help the guild doing it. At all.

Furthermore, if we don't cap on this soon, I can see attacking guilds having guilds with the same emblem wandering in, and as cool as "Gentlemen. [Begins acing them while they look around confused]" sounds, that's not how WoE should be executed. Flanking, diversions, breaches, false fronts, pincher attacks, that's how WoE strategy should be played.

Not this kiddie crap.

Image

Suggestions, agree/disagree, your opinion on how it should be handled; all welcome. I prefer you actually say why you give it a + or - though, instead of just going "-1" or "+10,00000000000 [picture of you achieving orgasm]"

[EDIT]:

Courtesy of Celica-

Another suggested rule:
-While semi-transparent emblems are acceptable, if it has such a low opacity it cannot be seen (i.e. 1%, 5%, etc.), it will be treated the same as the 1 pixel route. This will be on staff digression, rule of thumb being if it's readily visible, it's fine- but if you have to squint to even see it, it is not. If an emblem is deemed too transparent for use, it will need to be changed; argument about whether it is opaque or not will not function as it will not be up for debate.
Thanks Celica, for helping make our server better! <3
Last edited by Haelstrom on Sun Feb 07, 2010 6:26 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Image
Phaiyte
Metaling
Metaling
Posts: 212
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 12:23 am
Contact:

Re: Empty Emblems.

Post by Phaiyte »

I lol'd when I saw it going on.
Meanwhile confusing them by walking through and back through one single portal.
For some reason they were dumb enough to keep chasing after me
back and forth through the portal rofl.

But yeah, it's pretty retarded.
Leave your emblems on during woe.
Image
Pull the trigger and the nightmare stops.

To be the hero is all I'll ask.
Mitsuo
Santa Poring
Santa Poring
Posts: 24
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2009 9:27 pm

Re: Empty Emblems.

Post by Mitsuo »

I think there should be a rule against it. If Koma or Kiana just make it so they have to have a emblem and can't just delete it. they'll circumvent it like you said. But with a rule this stops it completely. It is a tactic in very poor taste and if it needs to be then there should be a rule against it.
Image
User avatar
Celica
Drops
Drops
Posts: 33
Joined: Sat Oct 03, 2009 10:33 am

Re: Empty Emblems.

Post by Celica »

and so we return to the age of prohibition where making rules against something fuels the fire. tbh- empty emblems isnt a threat. having a shotty guild that cant handle it is the real prob. approving this will give ppl a reason to do it b/c going against authority is fun and cool.

servers make this rule at the batching and moaning but its a perfectly fine tactic. imagine if guilds glory was enabled 2. no one would have an emblem.

let me rip the rules presented tho since they dont have reasonable limits:

•100% transparent/empty emblems.
-- what about 99.9% and 99.8% or even 90% whats the limit here b/c id complain about every emblem that hurts the eyes too. they should ban on that.
•Ridiculously small emblems to circumvent the above (i.e. "haha, my emblem is a 1 pixel black dot, it's okay! :3")
-- what about ppl who dont have emblems at all? new guilds? should they force ppl to have emblems?
•100% duplicate emblems (i.e. "hey, let's make our emblem look just like DA KNIGHTZ guild's, so they think we're them! o3o huhr huhr huhr") Obviously, recolors or significant changes with the same basic premise would be okay, but ones that are so similar that it's clear they're an attempt to cause confusion mid-WoE. I can see people trying to make a duplicate emblem and going "THEY'RE COPYING US" as a means of faux-attack, so seniority would take priority here to mitigate that.
-- what about small changes like changing the cb in yur emblem to cd? simple solution: change yur emblem if u have this prob. doing so means the gl of the fakers will have to spend more time copying it then recalling.

i find cb's emblem offensive. they should ban that. it represents dog raping by humans in my circles.

i think that making a rule like this will lead to more abuse n if anything, the same stuff u guys see with 'offensive' names. theres a fine line n its just calming those that r 2 lazy to look b4 u leap. next thing ull complain about is that hide and cloak shouldnt be allowed in woe. iirc this server is watering down woe way too much. what is this? sesame street woe?

the onyl thing id support is locking emblem changing during woe but this suggestion is overboard for sth part of the game. im sure ppl are whining in afghan and iraq rite now b/c they're "wearing our uniforms". right.. what happened to alls fair in love and war. there are more pressing issues with woe right now. like the amount of mcers inside of castles defending./
User avatar
Haelstrom
Bomb Poring
Bomb Poring
Posts: 257
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 2:49 pm
Location: Indiana.
Contact:

Re: Empty Emblems.

Post by Haelstrom »

Celica wrote:and so we return to the age of prohibition where making rules against something fuels the fire. tbh- empty emblems isnt a threat. having a shotty guild that cant handle it is the real prob. approving this will give ppl a reason to do it b/c going against authority is fun and cool.
So if we made botting okay, people'd stop doing it? I get where you're coming from, things made taboo fuel themselves, but there has to be a line drawn when they are of negative intent and purpose.
servers make this rule at the batching and moaning but its a perfectly fine tactic. imagine if guilds glory was enabled 2. no one would have an emblem.
It's not a tactic. It's a perversion of the whole guild system. There's not a drop of logic attached.

let me rip the rules presented tho since they dont have reasonable limits:
-- what about 99.9% and 99.8% or even 90% whats the limit here b/c id complain about every emblem that hurts the eyes too. they should ban on that.
Besides the fact the next rule addresses this, this clearly isn't about an eyesight or preference in style issue.
what about ppl who dont have emblems at all? new guilds? should they force ppl to have emblems?
The prior rule covers the first point, and the second: yes. In WoE, they should. It takes no time to make/obtain a guild emblem.
-- what about small changes like changing the cb in yur emblem to cd?
Just in advance: are you actually reading the whole post before you respond?
i find cb's emblem offensive. they should ban that. it represents dog raping by humans in my circles.
Has absolutely nothing to do with the subject at hand, and on that note I'm going to stop replying. Most of your post is already addressed by the first post, the rest is so off-topic it's ridiculous.
Image
User avatar
Celica
Drops
Drops
Posts: 33
Joined: Sat Oct 03, 2009 10:33 am

Re: Empty Emblems.

Post by Celica »

ill put it this way: if u were a gm here- would u know who to take action against in the cases outlined? or does someone with a little star as an emblem lose out everytime?

the only reason ppl r doing it is b/c they know your guild gets ants in pants with it.

btw, your rules dont address anything. they leave so many holes that some1 who really wanted to cause trouble can easily do so. thats my pt.
Phaiyte
Metaling
Metaling
Posts: 212
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 12:23 am
Contact:

Re: Empty Emblems.

Post by Phaiyte »

Celica wrote: i find cb's emblem offensive. they should ban that. it represents dog raping by humans in my circles.
I lol'd waaaaay too much rofl.
Celica wrote: what is this? sesame street woe?
I lol'd again.
Image
Pull the trigger and the nightmare stops.

To be the hero is all I'll ask.
User avatar
Haelstrom
Bomb Poring
Bomb Poring
Posts: 257
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 2:49 pm
Location: Indiana.
Contact:

Re: Empty Emblems.

Post by Haelstrom »

Celica wrote:ill put it this way: if u were a gm here- would u know who to take action against in the cases outlined? or does someone with a little star as an emblem lose out everytime?
If they are told to change the emblem and refuse to do so, depending on staff's take, the whole guild would suffer. Those who consistently do it would get kicked out of the guild unless that guild wants to not WoE. Really easy.
the only reason ppl r doing it is b/c they know your guild gets ants in pants with it.
Really? 'Cos I've only seen one guild heavily do it, and they've done virtually nothing against any major guild, offensive or defensive. The premise gets ants in my pants, not the people doing it. They're lol-mode.
btw, your rules dont address anything. they leave so many holes that some1 who really wanted to cause trouble can easily do so. thats my pt.
You've failed to point out even one loophole. I highly doubt it.

I'm cool for opposing opinions, but you're just not-subtle flaming and rage-denying.
Image
User avatar
Celica
Drops
Drops
Posts: 33
Joined: Sat Oct 03, 2009 10:33 am

Re: Empty Emblems.

Post by Celica »

theyre not opposing opinions.

youre asking that "100% transparent/empty emblems", "100% duplicate emblems", and "ridiculously small emblems" have action taken against them.

the loophole is simple: don't go 100%. what are your actual limits? the suggestion is stupid without a real grasp on reality of the issue at hand here: annoying emblems since thats all it really is at fault here. and thats a matter of opinion.
User avatar
Haelstrom
Bomb Poring
Bomb Poring
Posts: 257
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 2:49 pm
Location: Indiana.
Contact:

Re: Empty Emblems.

Post by Haelstrom »

Celica wrote:the loophole is simple: don't go 100%.
Doesn't matter if it has low opacity, long as it's visible. If it's for example, 1% opacity, it's essentially the same as example one or two.

That's not a loophole.
Image
Locked