amethyst mining abuse

[Chris419]

well it will be karma when they run their mps solo too

If they're petty enough to not help someone after getting denied, then they probably would not have helped anyways. Doesn't matter, there are plenty of strong players who are actually nice.

[bshallc2010]

I get what you say, and to the players who are attacking the same cart 3x on the same player fair enough do your kamikaze swarms, but is it fair to do that to the players who are trying to be fair about it and jus attack a player 1x?

I dun even try get 800 for example, my first cart I turn in jus 100, I only plunder to fill my second cart...

So you think my horrendous bullying deserves a kamikaze swarm?

I never said that you deserve it. I, personally, don't have an issue with getting hit 1x now and then...that's just the risk of doing the double reward time, as I see it.

What I'm saying is that when you make the decision to plunder other carts, be it 1x or 2x or 3x or whatever...you should be aware that there is a risk of the person you hit being a person who cares enough to kamikaze you and/or get a few like-minded friends in on the action.

[Wraithraiser]

If they're petty enough to not help someone after getting denied, then they probably would not have helped anyways. Doesn't matter, there are plenty of strong players who are actually nice.

Not true. I help a lot of people on my server and not really bothered by it - but someone gets butthurt over one attack and costs me double rewards? You think I'd help that? Right lol. Has nothing to do with pettiness, that's what you get, pretty fair exchange.

[Chris419]

Not true. I help a lot of people on my server and not really bothered by it - but someone gets butthurt over one attack and costs me double rewards? You think I'd help that? Right lol. Has nothing to do with pettiness, that's what you get, pretty fair exchange.

It was a fair exchange. You cause them to lose amethyst, they caused you to lose amethyst. How does denying help now make it a fair exchange? Sounds like you're the one who's butthurt actually.

[Wraithraiser]

It was a fair exchange. You cause them to lose amethyst, they caused you to lose amethyst. How does denying help now make it a fair exchange? Sounds like you're the one who's butthurt actually.

How is 30 the same as 130? Just sayin' you don't know **** lol

[FarrelBrown]

I think it's the same. A person can only be plundered 3 times so there can be three different people to pick to stop their cart. If you plunder someone three times, you're making sure you're the only name to pick. If you plunder once, then there might be two other names (so hopefully a 2/3 chance of not getting picked). If you happen to get picked, too bad. It's a risk you consciously accepted.

So being plundered is NOT something you consciously accepted by entering into amethyst mine? You seem to be applying rules to others without wanting to apply them to yourself. The whole "Nobody is allowed to attack me without the risk of reprisal" mentality you are displaying is (in my opinion) far more selfish than someone wanting to maximize their amethyst income. You are advocating a "nobody attacks anyone" environment but it's becoming more and more clear with each of your posts that you could care less as long as YOU get YOUR amethyst and woe be unto anyone who impedes that goal.

I absolutely agree that people spam plundering somebody is unsportsmanlike at best and downright ****-ish at worst which is why I don't do it. Same line of thinking that led me to wait for people to get carts in BGs before I killed them is what leads me to plunder someone once per cart and I honestly don't see how you can view that as worthy of "justice or karma".

Ultimately this whole trend strikes me as bottled up frustration from Light/Non-cashers towards the Mid/Hard cashers they have watched dominate this game. They feel helpless because they either don't have or cannot justify spending the money that some people spend on this game. This frustration makes itself apparent constantly in threads about the P2W aspect of this game, "Who is Zebq?(Or other equivalent hard casher) A hacker/GM/R2 plant?" threads or any number of other similar posts. Now that these light/non-cashers have an outlet for their frustration and a way to actually inconvenience the hard cashers they are gravitating to it because it offers them a chance to feel like they are in control of something. Trying to justify it as "karma" is just ridiculous. Call it what it is. You want to feel like you have an advantage over somebody who is much stronger than you.

[gruntar]

Afaik it will gain a 10 sec timer after atks in 2.2? or so

[Chris419]

So being plundered is NOT something you consciously accepted by entering into amethyst mine? You seem to be applying rules to others without wanting to apply them to yourself. The whole "Nobody is allowed to attack me without the risk of reprisal" mentality you are displaying is (in my opinion) far more selfish than someone wanting to maximize their amethyst income. You are advocating a "nobody attacks anyone" environment but it's becoming more and more clear with each of your posts that you could care less as long as YOU get YOUR amethyst and woe be unto anyone who impedes that goal.

I absolutely agree that people spam plundering somebody is unsportsmanlike at best and downright ****-ish at worst which is why I don't do it. Same line of thinking that led me to wait for people to get carts in BGs before I killed them is what leads me to plunder someone once per cart and I honestly don't see how you can view that as worthy of "justice or karma".

Ultimately this whole trend strikes me as bottled up frustration from Light/Non-cashers towards the Mid/Hard cashers they have watched dominate this game. They feel helpless because they either don't have or cannot justify spending the money that some people spend on this game. This frustration makes itself apparent constantly in threads about the P2W aspect of this game, "Who is Zebq?(Or other equivalent hard casher) A hacker/GM/R2 plant?" threads or any number of other similar posts. Now that these light/non-cashers have an outlet for their frustration and a way to actually inconvenience the hard cashers they are gravitating to it because it offers them a chance to feel like they are in control of something. Trying to justify it as "karma" is just ridiculous. Call it what it is. You want to feel like you have an advantage over somebody who is much stronger than you.

I accept that I can be plundered when I enter the mines. I also accept if I attack someone else, that someone might retaliate. People need to accept both parts. In a "nobody attacks anyone" environment, not only will I get my amethyst but everyone else will get their amethyst. Also why do you have the "I am allowed to attack everybody without being attacked back" mentality? Why should I allow everyone to freely attack me if I can fight back?

If you and two others plunder a person once per cart, the three of you collectively have spam plundered that person. Would you consider it acceptable if three people repeatedly attacked you taking turns until the time ran out? No one person stopped you from turning in your cart on time.

[FarrelBrown]

I accept that I can be plundered when I enter the mines. I also accept if I attack someone else, that someone might retaliate. People need to accept both parts. In a "nobody attacks anyone" environment, not only will I get my amethyst but everyone else will get their amethyst. Also why do you have the "I am allowed to attack everybody without being attacked back" mentality? Why should I allow everyone to freely attack me if I can fight back?

If you and two others plunder a person once per cart, the three of you collectively have spam plundered that person. Would you consider it acceptable if three people repeatedly attacked you taking turns until the time ran out? No one person stopped you from turning in your cart on time.

Like I said previously I don't get griefed in Amethyst mine so this isn't about me having any kind of "Nobody can attack me back" mentality. My opinion on this matter is strictly based on the comments I have seen on this topic and the experiences of some others I have spoken with. I also stated before I have no issue with people teaming up to "intercept" and keep people busy so their fellow guildies or friends can cart in relative peace or at the very least have a head start towards the turn in spot. What I have an issue with is the concept of retaliating for a single attack by spamming a person with attacks for an extended period of time. I'm fairly certain that THAT degrades the experience of this game a lot more than somebody being plundered a couple times.

By your own admission in previous posts you view the lock down retaliation strategy as your right because plundering is stealing your amethyst. You have also definitely inferred that people who plunder others are bad, or at least "not nice". Finally you have stated that you want amethyst mine to become a strictly carting environment which, while it may appeal to you, is not necessarily the wish of others so once again you are trying to impose your desires on others which is a form of bullying.

In conclusion I really think you should be a little more truthful with your underlying intentions. I don't buy the whole "justice or karma" argument and the insinuation (whether intended or not) that Cashers/High BR players who don't help everyone or who plunder are bad/wrong/mean/deserving of punishment, is just ignorant and silly.

[Chris419]

By your own admission in previous posts you view the lock down retaliation strategy as your right because plundering is stealing your amethyst. You have also definitely inferred that people who plunder others are bad, or at least "not nice". Finally you have stated that you want amethyst mine to become a strictly carting environment which, while it may appeal to you, is not necessarily the wish of others so once again you are trying to impose your desires on others which is a form of bullying.

And what about those who want to steal amethyst freely without retaliation? Retaliation isn't really a form of bullying since it's a reaction. As soon as you stop attacking, there won't be any retaliation. I would like to see the mine as strictly carting. Will it? Probably not like someone said, but I can try. If you want to make the mines purely about plunders, you can do that. I can't stop you. You are free to attack others and I'm free to attack you as well.

In conclusion I really think you should be a little more truthful with your underlying intentions. I don't buy the whole "justice or karma" argument and the insinuation (whether intended or not) that Cashers/High BR players who don't help everyone or who plunder are bad/wrong/mean/deserving of punishment, is just ignorant and silly.

The whole high BR people not helping is because someone posted that the people who retaliate shouldn't expect help from them because of it.
What I find silly is people are complaining about other players attacking back. If you think it's acceptable to attack other players in the mines, that's fine. It's your choice and decision. But you should also think it is acceptable for them to attack you.

[FarrelBrown]

The whole high BR people not helping is because someone posted that the people who retaliate shouldn't expect help from them because of it.
What I find silly is people are complaining about other players attacking back. If you think it's acceptable to attack other players in the mines, that's fine. It's your choice and decision. But you should also think it is acceptable for them to attack you.

And....like I said on at least 3 separate occasions already in this thread.....I am not saying that it is unacceptable to attack back. I am saying that the level of escalation you are advocating is skewed. I actually already put forth a suggestion on how people can strategically slow plunderers down without this whole lock down until double time is over concept.

It's like this:

1. Person A and Person B are playing a game where the goal is to gather as much of something as possible and the rules of this game not only allow but encourage forcefully taking the item from other players.
2. Person A is stronger than Person B so can easily take the items from them but based on the rules of the game can only take so much at a time and there is a limit on how much they can take all together.
3. Person B becomes upset because they are not strong enough to take from Person A within the framework of the game.
4. Now Person B can band together with Person C and Person D to distract Person A at different times and use their speed/maneuverability to try and keep Person A from catching any one of them and taking their items but instead Person B decides it is easier to just grab a baseball bat and knee-cap Person A so they can't move to the goal with the items they have accumulated by playing the game the way it was explained to them by the creators.

Now I have pointed out the flaws in the various suggestions regarding how Amethyst can be changed both yours and others

1. Bracketing or level difference limits won't keep people from being plundered it will just limit the plunderers choices and force them to focus on fewer targets rather than distributing their plundering in a way that is not invasive.
2. Not allowing people without carts to attack people with carts might be an option but I'm really not sure how much code would have to be changed/added in order to make it happen and it would likely cause plenty of bugs when first implemented. Not really worth it imo.
3. I still think you are trying to forcefully impose your ideal of how people should conduct themselves in Amethyst mine. Suggesting it is one thing and if people agree that it is the best option then that's awesome for you and your server. Telling people that if they plunder people even once they will be griefed to the point they can't turn in on time thus forcing them to change their style of play because you don't like it is completely different.

What I find hilarious about this whole situation is that we really don't have this problem on my server. There were a few spam plunders or griefers the first couple days but it ended quickly when the griefers realized how much of a waste of THEIR time it was to spend 20 minutes spam attacking people and the spam plunderers simply had it suggested to them in chat that they didn't need to go after the same person multiple times. See people tend to respond faster and in a more congenial manner when you speak and reason with them rather than grabbing for your knee-capping bat right away.

[TaakeAim]

And....like I said on at least 3 separate occasions already in this thread.....I am not saying that it is unacceptable to attack back. I am saying that the level of escalation you are advocating is skewed. I actually already put forth a suggestion on how people can strategically slow plunderers down without this whole lock down until double time is over concept.

It's like this:

1. Person A and Person B are playing a game where the goal is to gather as much of something as possible and the rules of this game not only allow but encourage forcefully taking the item from other players.
2. Person A is stronger than Person B so can easily take the items from them but based on the rules of the game can only take so much at a time and there is a limit on how much they can take all together.
3. Person B becomes upset because they are not strong enough to take from Person A within the framework of the game.
4. Now Person B can band together with Person C and Person D to distract Person A at different times and use their speed/maneuverability to try and keep Person A from catching any one of them and taking their items but instead Person B decides it is easier to just grab a baseball bat and knee-cap Person A so they can't move to the goal with the items they have accumulated by playing the game the way it was explained to them by the creators.

Now I have pointed out the flaws in the various suggestions regarding how Amethyst can be changed both yours and others

1. Bracketing or level difference limits won't keep people from being plundered it will just limit the plunderers choices and force them to focus on fewer targets rather than distributing their plundering in a way that is not invasive.
2. Not allowing people without carts to attack people with carts might be an option but I'm really not sure how much code would have to be changed/added in order to make it happen and it would likely cause plenty of bugs when first implemented. Not really worth it imo.
3. I still think you are trying to forcefully impose your ideal of how people should conduct themselves in Amethyst mine. Suggesting it is one thing and if people agree that it is the best option then that's awesome for you and your server. Telling people that if they plunder people even once they will be griefed to the point they can't turn in on time thus forcing them to change their style of play because you don't like it is completely different.

What I find hilarious about this whole situation is that we really don't have this problem on my server. There were a few spam plunders or griefers the first couple days but it ended quickly when the griefers realized how much of a waste of THEIR time it was to spend 20 minutes spam attacking people and the spam plunderers simply had it suggested to them in chat that they didn't need to go after the same person multiple times. See people tend to respond faster and in a more congenial manner when you speak and reason with them rather than grabbing for your knee-capping bat right away.

Pretty amazing post and I gotta agree, playing on the new east server we dont have any problems in mines really atm. Few big fishes plunder others but I dont think anybody hits the victim more than once per cart, at times in guild chat targets are even called so guild only hits the victim once per cart. When there is maybe 5 people who plunder with big fish status, there is quite a bit of smaller ones to go around and thus nobody gets plundered too much. My location is so close to dumping point and with how often I get 15 amethysts, there isnt too much plundering between smaller fishes, thus the ones who get hit still turns in quite a bit.

Key point, which is why you are likely only wasting your time, is he doesnt understand its a competition by intention. Or how the "bullies" who take his crystals are abiding rules and actually playing as the mines were clearly intended, while his temper tantrums and abuse of an oversight really isnt part of how the mines were intended. Never forget the attempt to bully people into doing as he wants, never caring what others might want. The level of childishness trying to justify clear abuse is quite incredible. I played hockey and while the sport has fairly bad name, least here, nobody went out of their way trying to injure the opposition even when losing, which is ultimately what he is advocating.

Edit: If somebody goes out of their way to harm my gaming, I will certainly add them on a list I wont lift a finger to help. If you beat me fair and square inside rules, so be it, its a game but if you really go out of your way and make it personal I can hardly be blamed if I dont feel like helping you.

[LexiiBelle]

lucky for us our top player is protecting low br from bullies

[PunkPetal]

And what about those who want to steal amethyst freely without retaliation? Retaliation isn't really a form of bullying since it's a reaction. As soon as you stop attacking, there won't be any retaliation. I would like to see the mine as strictly carting. Will it? Probably not like someone said, but I can try. If you want to make the mines purely about plunders, you can do that. I can't stop you. You are free to attack others and I'm free to attack you as well.The whole high BR people not helping is because someone posted that the people who retaliate shouldn't expect help from them because of it.What I find silly is people are complaining about other players attacking back. If you think it's acceptable to attack other players in the mines, that's fine. It's your choice and decision. But you should also think it is acceptable for them to attack you.

Retaliation would be attacking once, I said swarmers, who multiple attack after being attacked once in order prevent someone from receiving double rewards prolly won't end up getting help on maps...Purely because others will see the malice..

[Chris419]

And....like I said on at least 3 separate occasions already in this thread.....I am not saying that it is unacceptable to attack back. I am saying that the level of escalation you are advocating is skewed. I actually already put forth a suggestion on how people can strategically slow plunderers down without this whole lock down until double time is over concept.

It's like this:

1. Person A and Person B are playing a game where the goal is to gather as much of something as possible and the rules of this game not only allow but encourage forcefully taking the item from other players.
2. Person A is stronger than Person B so can easily take the items from them but based on the rules of the game can only take so much at a time and there is a limit on how much they can take all together.
3. Person B becomes upset because they are not strong enough to take from Person A within the framework of the game.
4. Now Person B can band together with Person C and Person D to distract Person A at different times and use their speed/maneuverability to try and keep Person A from catching any one of them and taking their items but instead Person B decides it is easier to just grab a baseball bat and knee-cap Person A so they can't move to the goal with the items they have accumulated by playing the game the way it was explained to them by the creators.

Now I have pointed out the flaws in the various suggestions regarding how Amethyst can be changed both yours and others

1. Bracketing or level difference limits won't keep people from being plundered it will just limit the plunderers choices and force them to focus on fewer targets rather than distributing their plundering in a way that is not invasive.
2. Not allowing people without carts to attack people with carts might be an option but I'm really not sure how much code would have to be changed/added in order to make it happen and it would likely cause plenty of bugs when first implemented. Not really worth it imo.
3. I still think you are trying to forcefully impose your ideal of how people should conduct themselves in Amethyst mine. Suggesting it is one thing and if people agree that it is the best option then that's awesome for you and your server. Telling people that if they plunder people even once they will be griefed to the point they can't turn in on time thus forcing them to change their style of play because you don't like it is completely different.

What I find hilarious about this whole situation is that we really don't have this problem on my server. There were a few spam plunders or griefers the first couple days but it ended quickly when the griefers realized how much of a waste of THEIR time it was to spend 20 minutes spam attacking people and the spam plunderers simply had it suggested to them in chat that they didn't need to go after the same person multiple times. See people tend to respond faster and in a more congenial manner when you speak and reason with them rather than grabbing for your knee-capping bat right away.

You need to expand your example better.
1. Person A, Person B, Person C, and Person D are playing a game where the goal is to gather as much of something as possible and the rules of this game not only allow but encourage forcefully taking the item from other players.
2. Person A, Person B, Person C are stronger than Person D so can easily take the items from them but based on the rules of the game can only take so much at a time and there is a limit on how much they can take all together.
3. Person D is upset to be pushed further back from their goal but has a tactic available to him within the confines of the game that Person A, Person B, and Person C do not like.
4. Instead of getting Person E, Person F, Person G, Person H, Person I, and Person J to coordinate and distract Person A, Person B, and Person C every night, Person D decides to individually use to the tactic that's available to him within the game on Person A, Person B, or Person C.
5. Now Person A, Person B, and Person C are upset they lost what they tried to steal and complains about it on the forums.

An even better example is Person A steals a pack of bills from Person B. However Person B had put in an ink pack with the bills and remotely sets it off. Now Person A is upset that Person B didn't let him keep the bills and that the ink got on his shirt. Person A then tries to argue that putting in the ink pack is very rude of Person B.

Retaliation would be attacking once, I said swarmers, who multiple attack after being attacked once in order prevent someone from receiving double rewards prolly won't end up getting help on maps...Purely because others will see the malice..

Attacking once won't do anything though. If someone stole $100 from you and you were given the option to make them lose $0.01, would you consider that fair? If you can make them lose nothing or lose $125, which would you pick?
If you pick nothing, please invite me to your house sometime.

Pretty amazing post and I gotta agree, playing on the new east server we dont have any problems in mines really atm. Few big fishes plunder others but I dont think anybody hits the victim more than once per cart, at times in guild chat targets are even called so guild only hits the victim once per cart. When there is maybe 5 people who plunder with big fish status, there is quite a bit of smaller ones to go around and thus nobody gets plundered too much. My location is so close to dumping point and with how often I get 15 amethysts, there isnt too much plundering between smaller fishes, thus the ones who get hit still turns in quite a bit.

Key point, which is why you are likely only wasting your time, is he doesnt understand its a competition by intention. Or how the "bullies" who take his crystals are abiding rules and actually playing as the mines were clearly intended, while his temper tantrums and abuse of an oversight really isnt part of how the mines were intended. Never forget the attempt to bully people into doing as he wants, never caring what others might want. The level of childishness trying to justify clear abuse is quite incredible. I played hockey and while the sport has fairly bad name, least here, nobody went out of their way trying to injure the opposition even when losing, which is ultimately what he is advocating.

Edit: If somebody goes out of their way to harm my gaming, I will certainly add them on a list I wont lift a finger to help. If you beat me fair and square inside rules, so be it, its a game but if you really go out of your way and make it personal I can hardly be blamed if I dont feel like helping you.

It's more like double or triple teaming in basketball. It's allowed in the game and makes it harder for that one player that's causing you a lot of trouble.