37 replies to this topic

[Mawai]

Although Zellbrigen itself is not counter to the terms of service ... there is absolutely NO requirement on any player on either side of a match to either accept or respect such a declaration.

If you want to try for a 1:1 then by all means do so .. however, anyone else can pile in at any time they want. They are not violating the terms of service by doing so and if they want to end the match as quickly as possible then that is up to them and whoever was participating in the "1v1" has no recourse or other reason for complaint.

The objective of the game is to eliminate the opposing team without griefing other players on your team which generally means no TK, no intentional fire against team mates, no intentional suiciding, and no objectionable text or speech. Folks can easily say "I want a 1v1 battle against <name>" but it is completely up to all individuals involved whether they accept that statement or not and it is NOT a TOS violation if they choose to ignore (or did not notice) any arrangements other players try to make within the match.

[Mystere]

1453 R, on 05 January 2017 - 07:13 AM, said:

Clearly there was enough of a concern to prompt someone to ask a GM for a ruling. I can only imagine it came out of the violent disdain shown for Zellbrigen in the given thread, given that it's the only Zell discussion I'm aware of in the last whenever.

And there you go again. Violent disdain? Really? The only one I saw releasing an F-bomb on that same thread was you. <smh>

And look at this gem from that same thread:

Evil Goof, on 28 December 2016 - 03:25 PM, said:

You are the kind of guy that makes wild assumptions.

I told you people are starting to notice.

1453 R, on 05 January 2017 - 07:13 AM, said:

Now I get that you're trying to hound me off the forums, but really, Mystere. I get too bored at work for that kind of thing to be likely. Sorry, mang - you're just going to have to find a way to tolerate living in a world where people have opinions and ideas that are both different than and contrary to your own.

Why would I want to hound you off the forums when I am having fun laughing at you?

And by the way, seeing different ideas and opinions are fine. Otherwise I would not listen -- and accept, within mathematically-based limits -- other people's proposals about CoF.

But watching someone constantly and wildly misrepresenting -- if not outright lying about -- ideas and opinions of others? Now that is something I want to put a stop to.

As I said, people are now noticing.


And just to keep on track ...

Random Carnage, on 05 January 2017 - 01:36 AM, said:

The OP's question was loaded given a narrow band of eligible conditions apparently weighted toward getting official approval of their position. If you 1v1 in PuG land, and you're red, expect to get shot. MWO is not a role playing game.

I both agree and disagree with your post.

I agree that anyone is fair game as long as they're RED. If I see you, I will shoot you, zell or no zell.

As for role playing, I disagree. I usually find myself role playing a suicidal maniac, especially when everyone acts like a bunch of chickens. So, if you are on on my team and everyone is just peeking and poking. be prepared for my now (hopefully) infamous:

Banzai!

Edited by Mystere, 05 January 2017 - 08:02 AM.

[Commoners]

I once challenged someone to a beach party on forest colony domination, and had a duel with one extra enemy observer present. I was in a commando with a really bad build, and the combatant was one of their better players. I just torso twisted and thrashed around while shooting his legs to delay his and his observer's return to the fight for as long as possible.

The ruse that was Operation: Commando Beach Party was a rousing success despite my death.

Edited by Commoners, 05 January 2017 - 08:07 AM.

[CMDR Sunset Shimmer]

1453 R, on 04 January 2017 - 03:18 PM, said:

Lots of people in the last Zell thread said they'd start reporting anyone who called for/accepted a Zellbrigen challenge, mostly because they hate puppies dislike the idea of people playing sub-games that "aren't a part of MWO the way the devs have built it" and want to try and force all single-combat challenges into private lobbies.

They aren't willing to acknowledge that a premeditated private-lobby '1v1 me, bruh' duel is basically just about the complete opposite of a Zellbrigen challenge, and robs the act of any meaning or satisfaction, and that calls for Zellbrigen are astonishingly rare as it is.

Nevertheless, good to have some extra clarification. Thanks.

Ahh, the old "Rules as Written" vs "House Rules" argument...

I'd just like to point out, I'm in favor of Zell, after all, Rules as Written, are the easiest way to break game systems.

Let's not forget that you can, within DnD3.5 rules, make arrows that can turn into mini black holes, and utterly destroy a campaign by getting 2 to 3 items and abusing their "as written" features.

It's also one of the biggest issues with balance in MWO's current "ruleset" and why frankly, we need a 3rd party planetary league that runs off of stock configs in the 3025 setting.

[Phoolan Devi]

Well, Zellbringen is a Clan thing. The only house on the IS side, that comes close is Kurita with its Bushido. So basically, and in the books written down, the IS used the clan honor (at bodding and especially at zellbringen) against them......by, in the here spoken case, ignoring it or, by the bidding, stating their forces lower than they actually were. So, according to lore, only clan players should have to ...or better have to....obey to zellbringen. IS pilots don't. Since we have mixed groups in QP, it is more than likely to be ignored.

[Archangel.84]

Mawai, on 05 January 2017 - 07:33 AM, said:

The objective of the game is to eliminate the opposing team without griefing other players on your team which generally means no TK, no intentional fire against team mates, no intentional suiciding, and no objectionable text or speech. Folks can easily say "I want a 1v1 battle against <name>" but it is completely up to all individuals involved whether they accept that statement or not and it is NOT a TOS violation if they choose to ignore (or did not notice) any arrangements other players try to make within the match.

Eh, if one of your teammates lines up a duel with an enemy on open chat and you go interfere for an easy kill I'd call that (mild) griefing.

[Mechteric]

Archangel.84, on 06 January 2017 - 02:18 PM, said:

Eh, if one of your teammates lines up a duel with an enemy on open chat and you go interfere for an easy kill I'd call that (mild) griefing.

I'd call it funny

[naterist]

Burke IV, on 04 January 2017 - 03:24 PM, said:

Every match i ever been in where a group of people take themself off to have a duel has " negatively impacted the experience"
Often because somebody will take command and pretend to play for a bit to facilitate the duel. Its a big fu to everybody there not involved in the duel. and people talk abotu honor.

dude, if your feeling lonely because someone else is off doin a zell fight, go challenge someone your self. its possible to have 12 1v1's going at once if you want.

[MischiefSC]

MacClearly, on 04 January 2017 - 05:57 PM, said:

Yes but since there is no zellwhatever built into the game, ignoring it and shooting the enemy is also not a violation. So anyone getting mad or shooting a teammate for not honouring something that which while it may exist in books, doesn't in the game, would be in the wrong.

In a such as the timeout penalty you get for team damage is your punishment.

So if two players go duel and I leg you when you go to break it up I get a time penalty on my next drop.

So, sorta yeah. Even if it comes down to a TK to let a duel play out. So long as I've fought the other team, done damage and participated I'll get a wait for my next match as punishment.

That's the system that exists in game.

[1453 R]

Mawai, on 05 January 2017 - 07:33 AM, said:

...
Folks can easily say "I want a 1v1 battle against <name>"
...

For the record, this is not actually a call to Zellbrigen. This is "1v1 me, bruh", which is what private lobbies are for and is something that was thoroughly handled in the other thread.

A call to Zellbrigen takes the form of something akin to the following: "This is MechWarrior 1453-R, pilot of the Viper in grid coordinates Charlie 4. I challenge Warrior MischiefSC (specific challenge, rare pre-fight format)/any foe brave enough to stand against me ('last man standing' general challenge, more typical post-match format) to honorable single combat in the rite of Zellbrigen at same coordinates. Let none interfere in this sacred contest."

Yes, the phrasing is important; yes, Zell is only Zell when called on the field of battle; and yes, only Clan pilots and possibly Kurita players have any real business calling Zellbrigen. Not that I'd discourage anyone from trying given the thoroughly un-Clanlike behavior of a staggering majority of Clan pilots in most matches anyways, but a proper call to Zellbrigen should be couched as a ritual challenge according to the rites and oaths of one's Clan and cast, not simple "Hey, Mischief! Come fight me, I wanna see you bleed! XP"

Those sorts of duel requests I would ignore; a proper call to Zellbrigen I would either accept or would avoid interfering with if at all possible.

[MacClearly]

MischiefSC, on 06 January 2017 - 04:00 PM, said:

In a such as the timeout penalty you get for team damage is your punishment.

So if two players go duel and I leg you when you go to break it up I get a time penalty on my next drop.

So, sorta yeah. Even if it comes down to a TK to let a duel play out. So long as I've fought the other team, done damage and participated I'll get a wait for my next match as punishment.

That's the system that exists in game.

Well that is part of what could be the punishment. So you get over a threshold, and get a penalty. However you can also be reported for intentional team damage. Continued reports and evidence that you were shooting your own players would lead to stiffer and stiffer penalties.

Again as well, you do not have a right to shoot a teammate for not playing how you think they should play and especially if what they are doing is not violating anything in the game. As it sits right now, zellwhachamacallit doesn't exist in the game. As far as I know even if it did as a Merc I would be under no obligation to follow along with it.

So there are a couple of systems that exist. None of them include private duels in the middle of a game. Wanna do that, go to a private lobby. Wanna try and do it in a quick play or FW drop, don't be mad or upset if others don't choose to follow something that exists only outside of the game.

[MischiefSC]

MacClearly, on 06 January 2017 - 06:03 PM, said:

Well that is part of what could be the punishment. So you get over a threshold, and get a penalty. However you can also be reported for intentional team damage. Continued reports and evidence that you were shooting your own players would lead to stiffer and stiffer penalties.

Again as well, you do not have a right to shoot a teammate for not playing how you think they should play and especially if what they are doing is not violating anything in the game. As it sits right now, zellwhachamacallit doesn't exist in the game. As far as I know even if it did as a Merc I would be under no obligation to follow along with it.

So there are a couple of systems that exist. None of them include private duels in the middle of a game. Wanna do that, go to a private lobby. Wanna try and do it in a quick play or FW drop, don't be mad or upset if others don't choose to follow something that exists only outside of the game.

I have the exact same "right" to shoot a teammate that the teammate has in shooting the enemy regardless of calls to a duel and such.

I'm playing to the mechanics that exist in game. Team damage is possible but incurs penalties. If I'm regularly TKing teammates I'll get a ban. That is playing to the mechanics as they exist in game. As mechs have a collision box to prevent moving into each other standing directly behind someone to trap them in the line of fire is absolutely within the game as designed and doesn't even involve a penalty.

In fact there's a ton of things I can do in game that are absolutely within the mechanics, both with a penalty and without.

Of course there's also the social contract. I can do those things but it would make me a jerk. That because I'm playing with other people there's a reasonable expectation of courtesy that should keep me from doing those things.

Same principle with duels/Zell. So long as it's not throwing the whole match the polite thing is to let it happen. Or you throw courtesy out and play to the mechanics, which puts a lot on the table.

[Papaspud]

When I see a call for zell, I go shoot them. Want to 1v1, get a private room.

[1453 R]

MacClearly, on 06 January 2017 - 06:03 PM, said:

Well that is part of what could be the punishment. So you get over a threshold, and get a penalty. However you can also be reported for intentional team damage. Continued reports and evidence that you were shooting your own players would lead to stiffer and stiffer penalties.

Again as well, you do not have a right to shoot a teammate for not playing how you think they should play and especially if what they are doing is not violating anything in the game. As it sits right now, zellwhachamacallit doesn't exist in the game. As far as I know even if it did as a Merc I would be under no obligation to follow along with it.

So there are a couple of systems that exist. None of them include private duels in the middle of a game. Wanna do that, go to a private lobby. Wanna try and do it in a quick play or FW drop, don't be mad or upset if others don't choose to follow something that exists only outside of the game.

The in-game chat system through which I can make a Zellbrigen challenge is part of the MWO that exists right now.

The lore I draw the rite of Zellbrigen from is the same lore than MWO itself is drawn from - the surrounding universe is what spawned the game and all its mechanics.

The maps with immense space and plenty of room for Zellbrigen challenges are part of the game.

Players, placed on the same map on opposing teams, are part of the game.

An objective is provided. Players may choose their own method of achieving that objective. One such way is utilizing in-game chat to offer a call to Zellbrigen. A player's conduct on the field of combat is their own; so long as they're not actively impeding their team or refusing to participate - and Zellbrigen is neither - then they are permitted to do whatever they can get away with.

TheB33f and his Long Tom Suicide Squad were not Permabanned Forever™ for turning the targeting rules of the Long Tom system on its head and using the enemy's own artillery against them. They were considered to be very clever players who found a legitimate, if originally unintended, workaround to do what they wanted to do.

A player who calls Zellbrigen is still engaging enemy players. They are actively participating in the match. They are not killing their teammates. They are not hiding in corners of the map to pad their KDR at the end of a Skirmish game - which many anti-Zellbrigen players find to be a perfectly acceptable and valid beheavior despite ACTUALLY being against CoC. They're fighting a fight with an enemy player and seeking to achieve their objective.

A player engaged in honorable Zellbrigen is not violating the terms of Piranha's game. They are not breaking Code of Conduct, as GM Patience stated. No, the individuals interfering in honorable Zellbrigen are also not violating CoC.

HOWEVER.

Nothing in the CoC explicitly forbids calls to Zellbrigen. It is not banned. GM Patience has stated that in the correct circumstances, calls for Zellbrigen are not actionable offenses. Zellbrigen is a time-honored part of the BattleTech universal lore that some players enjoy participating in.

Your entire argument boils down to "I don't like it so I'm going to screw with it." That's fine, we can't stop you. But you do not have a single toe to stand on for claims that Zellbrigen is against CoC or otherwise illegal. It is as much in the game as NASCAR or deathballing or any other player-driven behavior is. The fact that it is not baked specifically into the game mode rules or the fundamental interactions of MWO means all of jack, monkey, and squat.

if I call for Zellbrigen, my challengee accepts, we engage in our duel, one of us wins, and the game proceeds as normal from there? Nothing illegal or impermissible has been done. Two opposing players fought each other, one destroyed the other, game proceeds.

Suck it up, Charlie.

Edited by 1453 R, 06 January 2017 - 07:35 PM.

[MacClearly]

MischiefSC, on 06 January 2017 - 06:18 PM, said:

I have the exact same "right" to shoot a teammate that the teammate has in shooting the enemy regardless of calls to a duel and such.

I'm playing to the mechanics that exist in game. Team damage is possible but incurs penalties. If I'm regularly TKing teammates I'll get a ban. That is playing to the mechanics as they exist in game. As mechs have a collision box to prevent moving into each other standing directly behind someone to trap them in the line of fire is absolutely within the game as designed and doesn't even involve a penalty.

In fact there's a ton of things I can do in game that are absolutely within the mechanics, both with a penalty and without.

Of course there's also the social contract. I can do those things but it would make me a jerk. That because I'm playing with other people there's a reasonable expectation of courtesy that should keep me from doing those things.

Same principle with duels/Zell. So long as it's not throwing the whole match the polite thing is to let it happen. Or you throw courtesy out and play to the mechanics, which puts a lot on the table.

You make excellent points. Also since I have actually met you on TS and dropped with you, and read a lot of your responses on the forums, I respect you.

What my main argument boils down to is that what some consider courtesy others do not. If you came over to my house, chances are you would take off your shoes at the front door without me having to ask. This is common and universal behaviour/courtesy in NA. At least in the parts of Canada and the USA that I am personally familiar.

With Zellinburger, the is no understood or well accepted universal behaviour or expectation that is common enough to really be understood by everyone involved. Now a duel or whatever that happens when a game is decided and everyone agrees to it is fine. However, if someone says or decides that they want to shoot the enemy and don't have the patients or maybe they are role playing a scoundral, who knows. They, as the rules and guidelines are in their current state are, are permitted to do so with being team killed. Believe me as someone who has a couple of suspensions under his belt, that intentional team damage or team killing is considered by PGI to 'highly disruptive to the leasure and enjoyment of others' and that;
[color="#1B1D1E"]GM Serenity (Piranha Games) [/color]
[color="#BBBBBB"]Nov 23, 12:14 PST [/color]

[color="#2B2E2F"]Responding to another player who has violated the Code of Conduct is not an acceptable excuse for violating the Code of Conduct yourself. Please report the abusive players and let us take the appropriate action[/color]

So I disagree that this puts a lot on the table. While intentionally screwing with a teammates movement or blocking them so they can't get cover (actually that would be considered assisting the enemy), is universally frowned upon and I think understoood by most as not good. Zell or duel is not. Some feel it should be allowed and some don't. That split and disagreement coupled with it not being included in the game, makes honouring it a choice and not honouring it just as valid as a choice.

[Mystere]

MacClearly, on 07 January 2017 - 06:53 AM, said:

While intentionally screwing with a teammates movement or blocking them so they can't get cover (actually that would be considered assisting the enemy), is universally frowned upon and I think understoood by most as not good. Zell or duel is not. Some feel it should be allowed and some don't. That split and disagreement coupled with it not being included in the game, makes honouring it a choice and not honouring it just as valid as a choice.

Hear! Hear!

And by the way, I thought the prevailing attitude among most of the current player base is "**** lore!". Well, you're getting exactly what you wish for.

Edited by Mystere, 07 January 2017 - 07:27 AM.

[MacClearly]

1453 R, on 06 January 2017 - 07:34 PM, said:

The in-game chat system through which I can make a Zellbrigen challenge is part of the MWO that exists right now.

The lore I draw the rite of Zellbrigen from is the same lore than MWO itself is drawn from - the surrounding universe is what spawned the game and all its mechanics.

The maps with immense space and plenty of room for Zellbrigen challenges are part of the game.

Players, placed on the same map on opposing teams, are part of the game.

An objective is provided. Players may choose their own method of achieving that objective. One such way is utilizing in-game chat to offer a call to Zellbrigen. A player's conduct on the field of combat is their own; so long as they're not actively impeding their team or refusing to participate - and Zellbrigen is neither - then they are permitted to do whatever they can get away with.

TheB33f and his Long Tom Suicide Squad were not Permabanned Forever™ for turning the targeting rules of the Long Tom system on its head and using the enemy's own artillery against them. They were considered to be very clever players who found a legitimate, if originally unintended, workaround to do what they wanted to do.

A player who calls Zellbrigen is still engaging enemy players. They are actively participating in the match. They are not killing their teammates. They are not hiding in corners of the map to pad their KDR at the end of a Skirmish game - which many anti-Zellbrigen players find to be a perfectly acceptable and valid beheavior despite ACTUALLY being against CoC. They're fighting a fight with an enemy player and seeking to achieve their objective.

A player engaged in honorable Zellbrigen is not violating the terms of Piranha's game. They are not breaking Code of Conduct, as GM Patience stated. No, the individuals interfering in honorable Zellbrigen are also not violating CoC.

HOWEVER.

Nothing in the CoC explicitly forbids calls to Zellbrigen. It is not banned. GM Patience has stated that in the correct circumstances, calls for Zellbrigen are not actionable offenses. Zellbrigen is a time-honored part of the BattleTech universal lore that some players enjoy participating in.

Your entire argument boils down to "I don't like it so I'm going to screw with it." That's fine, we can't stop you. But you do not have a single toe to stand on for claims that Zellbrigen is against CoC or otherwise illegal. It is as much in the game as NASCAR or deathballing or any other player-driven behavior is. The fact that it is not baked specifically into the game mode rules or the fundamental interactions of MWO means all of jack, monkey, and squat.

if I call for Zellbrigen, my challengee accepts, we engage in our duel, one of us wins, and the game proceeds as normal from there? Nothing illegal or impermissible has been done. Two opposing players fought each other, one destroyed the other, game proceeds.

Suck it up, Charlie.

The in game chat could also be used to call out for tons of stuff that is as zellinburger is, not part of the game. I could ask you for your credit card information or use it to advertise. Both violate the CoC. Still it could be used for that.

So while you can ask for it, absolutely no one is obligated to sit back and allow for it to happen. Add to this that in a lot of circumstances it would be in violation of the current rules. Basically, for it to not be a violation, everyone has to agree for one, and it has to not interfere with any other objective in the game. So if someone says no, then you can't get upset for their decision.

The B33f was far from the first person to use lights to rush into the enemy team and use long tom against them. Long tom actually existed in the game at that time and no one considered that strategy as an exploit, especially PGI. So this is not relevant.

Also read gm patience's response carefully. If under those outlined circumstances, zellwhachamacallit, is not a violation. Not paying any attention to it, since it doesn't actually exist in game is also not a violation.

So basically you are arguing that something that is not in the game is permissable, and under some circumstances you are correct. However, equally valid is since it is not part of the game there is zero obligation by any player to sit back and watch a private duel in front of them.

Are you following Chuck?

[MacClearly]

Mystere, on 07 January 2017 - 07:17 AM, said:

Hear! Hear!

And by the way, I thought the prevailing attitude among most of the current player base is "**** lore!". Well, you're getting exactly what you wish for.

Not sure if that is the prevailing attitude. My interpretation and experience leans towards being against hardliners who feel that stringent table top rules should be inforced in a first person shooter.