I never was too keen on structured play. I'm gonna go with Jackson (gasp) on this one. I don't think it is akin to team killing. Sorry... I do see your point though Wig.

It's akin to teamkilling in the sense that it bespeaks a disregard for other players. It's just another way of stepping on someone else's fun to facilitate one's own, s'all.

General jackson wrote: I have been playing many games where players are doing the exact opposite of what the game title says. This does not bother me at all it just ads to the excitement!! Especially during a dogfight match. Players are bombing hangers and dogfighting at the same time. I don't see any issue i have never complained once when i see a certain few do the opposite of what the game title says:))

I can't say that I'm surprised you feel this way about it, as btb and btc would require that you fly with a bomb.

I wholeheartedly agree with wig and luna etc, here's how I see it.

I play a fair game, I only drop if needed and I dont go outside of the std game mission intent. If you choose to get points through shortcuts then im sure the moderators will be proud to lay down the law where its needed, I know of a pilot who has done this and he is a moraf...this is only a points based title to those who use shortcuts. I myself am not a moraf yet but like many others I will be proud when that day comes because I will get there in a respectfull way. It doesnt pay to use this indecent method as the guy I spoke of getting moraf through shortcutting, well he has no real skill at playing the game, if you choose to then you will end up looking like an idiot and everyone will know by the skills you bring to the table. By playing properly you hone your skills so that you are ready to then take on pilots that are higher in rank and sometimes you will win! But thats the point. Let me leave you with a phrase which I have cometo live by....

A coward dies a thousand times.....a hero only once.

I know which I would like to be known as, do you?

Now now, Anthony...is that any way to talk about TheonlySoos?

Oh, wait...different idiot. Uh...never mind. In any case you're in my wheelhouse with the quote from Julius Caesar...

CAESAR
    What can be avoided
Whose end is purposed by the mighty gods?
Yet Caesar shall go forth, for these predictions
Are to the world in general as to Caesar.

CALPHURNIA
When beggars die there are no comets seen.
The heavens themselves blaze forth the death of princes.

CAESAR
Cowards die many times before their deaths.
The valiant never taste of death but once.
Of all the wonders that I yet have heard,
It seems to me most strange that men should fear,
Seeing that M.O.M, a necessary end,
Will come when it will come.

~Edward De Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford, a k a William Shake-speare

Wig, wouldn't that technically make "circusing", trips up Duckwing Mountain, and the pursuit of Paul's tunnels a no go then? If I follow the same logic, all non mission oriented activity would be verboten then.

Jacklpe wrote: Wig, wouldn't that technically make "circusing", trips up Duckwing Mountain, and the pursuit of Paul's tunnels a no go then? If I follow the same logic, all non mission oriented activity would be verboten then.

The quote below your banner fits this statement perfectly.

"If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullcrap"

As this topic was started based upon collecting points via a hanger glitch and disrupting the fun of the game. Where as one who circus fly's or searches for the infamous tunnel disrupts none. As to say, they are not point farming or taking advantage of a game glitch and just having childish fun.

Eventually I see this going the direction that most of these topics travel. One will get butt hurt and start charging one with lack of skill and whining. Always seems to end up in that text when the gas has left one's sails and has no valid point to continue with the origin of the thread.

Four or five months away from this forum...

... and when I try to go back, I see things didn't change: you guys take this game way too seriously!!! (post edit: myself included... )

Just to avoid being misjudged: No, I don't abuse the glitches/bugs. I don't go bomb the hangArs (with an 'A', not an 'E') in CTC or BTC missions. And yes, I saw many players doing it. Last saturday, I was playing a BTC alone, against two red noobs. I was flying, slowed down by my only bomb, and bring both down on my first run. One of them came back on a plane, and took my attention. You can guess what happened: I completely forgot the other guy, and he simply took the tank, went to "my" airfield, shot the first two hangars; he called my attention, and when I headed to him, the other guy shot my six - and the tank guy bombed all the hangars before I could return for him.

Can I blame them??? Absolutely not!!! Although I am not (and never will be) an ace, my plane was way faster and more powerfull than theirs, and they was easy preys - even for a weak player like me. So what? They managed to win that mission, period. So whats wrong? NO THING!! DO I CARE?? NO WAY!!! BIG DEAL!!!... Next game, simple as that.

Hey, it's a MOBILE GAME!!! It simply doesn't worth writing long dissertations about fairplaying, about fly-with-honor, about this or that!!!! (erm... so why am I writing this???? )

Too much of a drama!!!

I will save you judgers some work regarding my behavior in game:
a) when I am outnumbered, I always drop my bomb to defend my base, waiting for some blue's arivals, making teams even again. Hey, I am confessing, I am a dropper!!!! Bring me to hell!!!
b) when I am in a bomb rush, I spawn kill relentless (well, at least I try to, cuz most of time I got killed)... So, ban me, please, I am a spawnkiller!
c) when the reds are too tough AND I am on the outnumbered/even team, sometimes I DO SNEAK. Hey, put me on the black list, Im a coward!!!!!
Come on!!!!!!

The fun thing about all this discution is that some "righteous players" are, sometimes, way too hypocrite to my taste: for example, sometimes (most of time), the server puts the player on a 6-guys-team against one or two poor red souls. And I already saw many well known, widely respected morafs playing these kind of games on the bigger team, as if they was even, fair games... Hey, if some of the "mr. perfects" around cares that much for "fly with honor" and "fairplay to the end", they would NEVER play on lopsided games, in NO CIRCUMSTANCES!!! I, for example, always try to switch when I enter a lopsided game, to even forces... But I know, some of you would say: "But what if, after several minutes on an even game, some of the red guys suddenly disappears, due battery low or phone calls?" I know, I know, its hard to let a game that is near the end, near the victory, after tough, long, paired battles, etc, etc... I don't quit or switch when the reds bails after a long battle. But the fact is: for someone that insists on being so enphatic in defense of fairplay, and that criticize so hardly those who sneak, those who bomb hangars in no-btb-games, where is their coherence if they keep playing on games when they are on the outnumbering team?? Too much of sanctimony.

Please, I am not judging or criticizing those who keep playing on the outnumbering team, cuz I do it sometimes - all I want is to emphasize the need of coherence.

So, please, lets put an end on this drama. Its just a GAME!!! If some player is bothering you, do as I do: QUIT, and CHOOSE ANOTHER SERVER!!!

It would be a lot easier, and more drama-free, to ask/wait Zuperman to fix these issues to prevent hangars in games where they are pointless (in the same way he prevented planes from carrying bombs in zep missions). But of course he is working on it. Nevertheless, talking about issues, its way easier for one to learn to live with them, cuz they are A LOT, as everyone already know... (jeez, what a marvelous, wonderful, defective and addictive piece of software we suffer from!)

And taking the opportunity, I believe that mod's work is necessary, but for things that are REALLY BAD, like dirty-mouths and team killers. For example, I reported (several times) a player named "Hijo de puta", for obvious reasons... but no sanction has applied to this player until yesterday. It makes me believe that the "report" button is useless, after all...

Sorry for one more drama... I believe I will need another five-months-break. Oh, the addiction...

So now it has morphed from the topic of a glitch to the same old never ending drama of sk, camping or lopsided honorable play. As predicted, it should now progress into, you have no skill, stop whining.

bellsaj wrote:

General jackson wrote: I have been playing many games where players are doing the exact opposite of what the game title says. This does not bother me at all it just ads to the excitement!! Especially during a dogfight match. Players are bombing hangers and dogfighting at the same time. I don't see any issue i have never complained once when i see a certain few do the opposite of what the game title says:))

I can't say that I'm surprised you feel this way about it, as btb and btc would require that you fly with a bomb.

yep and seeing I'm able to drop a bomb whenever i choose, I shall do so whether it's on a ship or in the water...bombers need fighters..

Wigbomb wrote:

General jackson wrote: I have been playing many games where players are doing the exact opposite of what the game title says. This does not bother me at all it just ads to the excitement!! Especially during a dogfight match. Players are bombing hangers and dogfighting at the same time. I don't see any issue i have never complained once when i see a certain few do the opposite of what the game title says:))

By that logic, if convention dictates that you shoot reds and not blues, why not bust up a buncha blues! It's exciting! I see a very definite issue; one way of thinking adheres to the spirit of respecting the game experience of the people with whom you're playing, all of whom have a perfect right to expect Mission Type X to be played as Mission Type X, as indicated when both you and they joined the game. The other way of thinking applauds a no holds barred attitude, in which case we'd better be prepared to allow team killing, friendly hangar bombing, spawn tanking and anything else any individual's rendition of "My Way" might designate as "fun". Fun for the one, not so much fun for the all.

The point that was made about this hangar glitch being in the same vein as the old invisible-soldier-on-deck glitch is flawed; the point of the soldier was to capture and/or hold the carrier, just as the tank-on-deck provided another way to destroy the carrier. Glitch, gimmick or legitimate tactic, they were employed directly in the effort to win the assigned mission. This hangar business is precisely the opposite, and that's the point.

Well as I see it, if I see players who pay for the game want to bomb a hanger in a dogfight mission. Then they can and I never will complain(as long as they don't tank spawn kill or team kill). I still play how I usually play whether anyone wants to follow the game title or not. I myself sticks to what with the games says..when zup fixes the glitch then we can all be friends again

[M]bzerkbzerk wrote: So now it has morphed from the topic of a glitch to the same old never ending drama of sk, camping or lopsided honorable play. As predicted, it should now progress into, you have no skill, stop whining.

Oh, am I whining? Jeez, thanks for leting me know it!

And it is not "morphing". It is being discussed, being developed. I used examples to show how hypocrisy and incoherence is all around. Myself included (I am a mad man, don't you know?)

And thanks to all the good and well respected players that sent me private messages of support after my previous post! I see I am not alone fighting all those windmills!

This forum drives me nuts. That's why I like it.

Pedrinho wrote:

[M]bzerkbzerk wrote: So now it has morphed from the topic of a glitch to the same old never ending drama of sk, camping or lopsided honorable play. As predicted, it should now progress into, you have no skill, stop whining.

Oh, am I whining? Jeez, thanks for leting me know it!

And it is not "morphing". It is being discussed, being developed. I used examples to show how hypocrisy and incoherence is all around. Myself included (I am a mad man, don't you know?)

And thanks to all the good and well respected players that sent me private messages of support after my previous post! I see I am not alone fighting all those windmills!

This forum drives me nuts. That's why I like it.

No Pedrinho, I was not saying you are a whiner. Just observing the path this seems to take as usual.

Ok what it all comes down to is have some.damn respect for players trying to play the game at hand

No problem, Bzerk.
But just for your information: erm... cough... I AM a whiner (just keep this in secret)

Pedrinho wrote: No problem, Bzerk.
But just for your information: erm... cough... I AM a whiner (just keep this in secret)

LMAO

Apparently were in the same boat.

Anyway, I believe we could face this issue from an entirely new perspecive:

Some time ago, we at forum used to talk about possible new missions, among other things like new planes, new terrains, etc.

Hey, new missions are out there already!!!!

I can't resist to ask: WHY NOT?

Lets face these destroyable-hangars-on-carrier-missions as a new challenge!!!

Do you want to win the mission? Don't you want to lose it fo the reds? Simple: use tatics! Send one of your pilots to bomb the red hangars, while another one patrols your base and the other two pilots (considering a 4 v 4 "perfect" game) could do the carrier work. I stongly believe that these games can be really fun to play, if all pilots accept them as they are!

How about it?

I agree with pedre but I dont like the unfair facts, like last night when it was me and a new guy against 5, and the reds decide since we are a solid wall at the carrier on the other end of the map, the reds teamkill and then tank all 8 hangers before we could do anything. That sicked me.

[M]bzerkbzerk wrote:

Jacklpe wrote: Wig, wouldn't that technically make "circusing", trips up Duckwing Mountain, and the pursuit of Paul's tunnels a no go then? If I follow the same logic, all non mission oriented activity would be verboten then.

The quote below your banner fits this statement perfectly.

"If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullcrap"

As this topic was started based upon collecting points via a hanger glitch and disrupting the fun of the game. Where as one who circus fly's or searches for the infamous tunnel disrupts none. As to say, they are not point farming or taking advantage of a game glitch and just having childish fun.

Eventually I see this going the direction that most of these topics travel. One will get butt hurt and start charging one with lack of skill and whining. Always seems to end up in that text when the gas has left one's sails and has no valid point to continue with the origin of the thread.

My point was regarding my perception of Wig's desire to stay on mission. Nothing more, nothing less.

You don't like my post? Good for you. Now on to more important matters...

LoneStar wrote: I agree with pedre but I dont like the unfair facts, like last night when it was me and a new guy against 5, and the reds decide since we are a solid wall at the carrier on the other end of the map, the reds teamkill and then tank all 8 hangers before we could do anything. That sicked me.

The unfair facts you mentioned spoils ont only these "new missions", but all the missions. You were on a lopsided game, and reds did teamkilling to use their tanks... Nothing new, my friend; I already faced this kind of questionable behavior many times before, months ago, in "normal" bomb-the-carrier missions. I lost most of those games, of course. Its only a game: you lose now, minutes later you win. No need for drama...

Jacklpe wrote:

[M]bzerkbzerk wrote:

Jacklpe wrote: Wig, wouldn't that technically make "circusing", trips up Duckwing Mountain, and the pursuit of Paul's tunnels a no go then? If I follow the same logic, all non mission oriented activity would be verboten then.

The quote below your banner fits this statement perfectly.

"If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullcrap"

As this topic was started based upon collecting points via a hanger glitch and disrupting the fun of the game. Where as one who circus fly's or searches for the infamous tunnel disrupts none. As to say, they are not point farming or taking advantage of a game glitch and just having childish fun.

Eventually I see this going the direction that most of these topics travel. One will get butt hurt and start charging one with lack of skill and whining. Always seems to end up in that text when the gas has left one's sails and has no valid point to continue with the origin of the thread.

My point was regarding my perception of Wig's desire to stay on mission. Nothing more, nothing less.

You don't like my post? Good for you. Now on to more important matters...

And I was so sure I'd made myself painfully clear; I'm not espousing some slavish "desire to stay on mission", I'm suggesting that the experience of the other players in a mission be considered above one's own inclination to do as one damn well pleases.

By all means park on a mountain or noodle around at the bridge if that's what stokes your personal boiler, just don't influence the game the other seven people are there to play. And yes, before some nitpicker picks the inevitable nit, that does include diminishing a team's strength by taking up space screwing around while other blues are trying to compete. If you want to race tanks or go spelunking in non-existent tunnels, have a fit. Do it when everyone agrees to that "mission statement" or push off for another mission on a different server, not when your program conflicts with that of the rest of the people who, by the way, have also paid to play the game they paid to play, not the game to which you've decided they now have to adapt because it suits you better than the one stated in the mission brief.

The idea here should be less about arguing for argument's sake and more about showing a little respect, n'est-ce pas?

Wigbomb wrote:

Jacklpe wrote:

[M]bzerkbzerk wrote:

Jacklpe wrote: Wig, wouldn't that technically make "circusing", trips up Duckwing Mountain, and the pursuit of Paul's tunnels a no go then? If I follow the same logic, all non mission oriented activity would be verboten then.

The quote below your banner fits this statement perfectly.

"If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullcrap"

As this topic was started based upon collecting points via a hanger glitch and disrupting the fun of the game. Where as one who circus fly's or searches for the infamous tunnel disrupts none. As to say, they are not point farming or taking advantage of a game glitch and just having childish fun.

Eventually I see this going the direction that most of these topics travel. One will get butt hurt and start charging one with lack of skill and whining. Always seems to end up in that text when the gas has left one's sails and has no valid point to continue with the origin of the thread.

My point was regarding my perception of Wig's desire to stay on mission. Nothing more, nothing less.

You don't like my post? Good for you. Now on to more important matters...

And I was so sure I'd made myself painfully clear; I'm not espousing some slavish "desire to stay on mission", I'm suggesting that the experience of the other players in a mission be considered above one's own inclination to do as one damn well pleases.

By all means park on a mountain or noodle around at the bridge if that's what stokes your personal boiler, just don't influence the game the other seven people are there to play. And yes, before some nitpicker picks the inevitable nit, that does include diminishing a team's strength by taking up space screwing around while other blues are trying to compete. If you want to race tanks or go spelunking in non-existent tunnels, have a fit. Do it when everyone agrees to that "mission statement" or push off for another mission on a different server, not when your program conflicts with that of the rest of the people who, by the way, have also paid to play the game they paid to play, not the game to which you've decided they now have to adapt because it suits you better than the one stated in the mission brief.

The idea here should be less about arguing for argument's sake and more about showing a little respect, n'est-ce pas?

It was the inevitable nit. Sounds like my understanding of your position is spot on though. You just don't tell someone to "have a fit" unless they are pretty damn obnoxious to you. I too have been known to get irritated when I'm trying as hard as I can, and my other teammates are off trying to see how high they can fly before they crash or whatever. I just don't know if I'm ready to make that another "thing" yet. There are already so many "things" now. Camping, spawn killing, failure to fly in perfectly straight lines while bomb laden and firing only straight ahead so that some new guy doesn't feel like he's not as good as everyone else.... Too many "things"...
Then again, I only play like once a month now, so what do I care? I'm addicted to the Jolly Roger thread now. That's my baby, no matter how ridiculous it is. The game lost its luster a long time ago for me.

Oh yea, almost forgot "point farming". I don't even know what the hell that is, but it sounds really bad. Is that kinda like setting up a grow house in one of the hangars? I'm afraid I'm much to simple minded for this here discussion.

"Have a fit" is merely an expression, no more indicative of my sense of someone's obnoxiousness than any other expression I might use to say "do as you like", "go nuts", "knock yourself out". You're working overtime to find something in this "thing" that isn't there.

Contrariness for sport aside, I suspect your take on my position is less than spot on, otherwise we wouldn't still be kicking it around. Here it comes again:

Play the game that the game dictates when other players are trying to play that game. Play whatever you please when you're alone.

Well said Wig

well, this was a fun thread to read...
in any case, I think the bug will be fixed today. Otherwise, I wouldn't kill anyone for taking advantage of the bug, to me it was kind of fun trying to protect the hangars while the ctc or zep was going on.

Yeah, Zup!!!

Please, if new missions aren't coming soon, please, let these "buggy" missions stay for a while... I am quite sure we could "learn", "adapt", "accept" (whatever word fits it) to play them in the state they are: I like them!!!!

The only downside is that these "mixed misisons" potentializes the problem of lopsides games (in other words, if playing outnumbered was already hard on BTC and CTC, doing so on these mixed missions is even harder, near impossible). But hey, they are novelty, they are the innovation that we (or some of us) always wanted and... cough... erm... long waited for.

You said with few words what I wanted to stress (with no success): THESE MIXED MISSIONS ARE, INDEED, PLAYABLE, AND ARE HELL OF A FUN!!!

I dare to ask again:

WHY NOT?

EDIT: How ironic... Of all the glitches, bugs and defects this game has and had, it seems you will just fix the one that is more fun... lol
As a sugestion (just one of many I have in my mind), you should make players to be unable to take tanks when they are shot by their teammates (to prevent abuses like the one kestrel reported);

Wigbomb wrote: "Have a fit" is merely an expression, no more indicative of my sense of someone's obnoxiousness than any other expression I might use to say "do as you like", "go nuts", "knock yourself out". You're working overtime to find something in this "thing" that isn't there.

Contrariness for sport aside, I suspect your take on my position is less than spot on, otherwise we wouldn't still be kicking it around. Here it comes again:

Play the game that the game dictates when other players are trying to play that game. Play whatever you please when you're alone.

No sport to it. My suspicion was that we just had a legitimate difference of opinion. Notice how I haven't tried to convince you that you are wrong, rather only told you that I have trouble being on board?

The last answer was a good one though.

Mr Z... Lemonade from Lemons.... Even better answer.

I guess I'm still struggling with the seeming lack of acknowledgement - by more than just you, Dave - of the fact that there are other people involved! I wouldn't have thought that to be so elusive a point. If there's a "right or wrong" in here it's nothing to do with me trying to shove a personal opinion down your throat...it doesn't strike me as a matter of opinion when player A is declaring himself within his rights to dictate an off-book mission to players B, C, D, E, F, G and H. I have yet to be in a single glitched mission where the players not bombing hangars didn't complain about the player bombing the hangars. Possibly I'm not prioritizing properly, I generally defend what the seven want over what the one wants in such cases.

Ped, I'm glad you enjoy the glitch-missions. Matter of fact I think they can be an entertaining diversion, myself. I don't get wiggy with 'em because it isn't my right to force people who don't want to to play the glitch. The game doesn't exist to serve my personal whim.

After saying which, I'm all outta ways to rephrase it.

Wig,

Before entering the subjetc, I need to enphasize that I learn a lot with your writing stile (yours and Luna's), but sometimes it is too "rich" for my bad English - so, sometimes I probably don't get what you mean, I can only deduce your position from the context and from some key words.

Now, on the subject: In fact, these glitch-missions are fun, but I admit that, in the beginning, I used to say "WTF??" many times, when sudenly a red player kept bombing hangars that I didn't even think that was there, and my face was even worse when I saw that "You lose" message despite noticing both carriers at almost full health. But as I said, it is easier for us, players, to adapt to this new situation than for Zup to change tons of code. By the way, Zup could simply put a phrase at the beginning of the mission, saying something like "the first to capture the carriers AND/OR destroy the hangars wins", instead of reprogramming lots of functions and object-oriented stuff.

And, compared to other "game changes" that took place on past months, this kind of change is almost nothing.

I respect your opinion, but in a war, it would be ridiculous if an army complained at the enemies because they use bombs to destroy the hangars, since bombs are one button away from their fingers, and the enemy hangars are there, begging to be destroyed. This is just a game, and more important: is a game about war. As in love, everything is admissible to reach the objective (that, in this case, more than just "capture the carrier", is "win the mission")...

And about seven players wanting to play "straight", while only one wants to bomb: instead of interpreting the scenario like "we don't agree with your disrespect of the rules", why not acting like "we won't let you bomb our hangars, so eat our bullets"?

(jeez, this time, even I can't be sure of what I wrote - my poor brain is on fire, sorry)

Wigbomb wrote: I guess I'm still struggling with the seeming lack of acknowledgement - by more than just you, Dave - of the fact that there are other people involved! I wouldn't have thought that to be so elusive a point. If there's a "right or wrong" in here it's nothing to do with me trying to shove a personal opinion down your throat...it doesn't strike me as a matter of opinion when player A is declaring himself within his rights to dictate an off-book mission to players B, C, D, E, F, G and H. I have yet to be in a single glitched mission where the players not bombing hangars didn't complain about the player bombing the hangars. Possibly I'm not prioritizing properly, I generally defend what the seven want over what the one wants in such cases.

Ped, I'm glad you enjoy the glitch-missions. Matter of fact I think they can be an entertaining diversion, myself. I don't get wiggy with 'em because it isn't my right to force people who don't want to to play the glitch. The game doesn't exist to serve my personal whim.

After saying which, I'm all outta ways to rephrase it.

You never needed to rephrase it (for me anyway). As I said in the beginning of all of this, I see your point.

I just hesitate somewhat before we all come up with another "thing" that we should all suddenly be against.