Ethics in WPvP

PVP War Mode and World PvP
1

Don’t want to read a wall of text? Take an anonymous 10 question WPvP ethics survey instead. Takes about 2 mins. Survey results available now!

In 15 years of WoW WPvP, there have been many complaints about unethical behaviour. Both the complaints and the behaviour will continue as long as WPvP is what it is now, has always been, and hopefully will be for a long time to come - an open world PvP system that allows us to decide how we play the mode.

It’s unavoidable to take a stance on ethics in WPvP. From one extreme of not caring at all, to the other extreme of having your own clearly defined unbreakable rules that prevent you attacking other players unless 100% fair. And everything in between those two extremes. Ethics in WM are not black and white, they are grey, and depend on your viewpoint.

How much fun you have in WPvP, is at least partly going to depend on your stance. The more you lean towards being fair, the less happy you will be, because WPvP is for sure not fair. Never was. Should WPvP be changed to satisfy the extreme ethicals? No.

The fact Blizz did not add ethical limits in WM WPvP is deliberate. They gave us choice, each individual behaving slightly differently, with their own individual motivations and stance on ethics. That’s part of what makes WM a rich WPvP environment - your choices, and the choices of your allies and enemies affect the outcomes. It’s a dynamic PvP system, where anything can happen.

It’s ironic though, the players that are most concerned about ethics, tend to be the ones that are the most abusive in game chat and on this forum. Which is ironically, unethical!

Sure, post your viewpoint on the forum - but you cannot win the argument on WPvP ethics, and neither can I… but fun to try :smile:

WPvP Ethics Challenge

Can you argue with the statements below? If yes, quote and respond to individual points with either the word Agree or Disagree. Ifs and buts will be inadmissible for the challenge, but ofc state your opinions. And for increased difficulty, a response must not conflict with your response on the previous point. Answer all Agree or Disagree to win - that is your challenge.

  1. Blizz’s official rules on PvP harassment state that unethical WPvP such as corpse camping and lowbie killing are legitimate PvP tactics.
  2. Therefore, players are free to make up their own ethics rules (within ToS), but other players have no obligation to follow those rules. Especially since made up rules inevitably vary from player to player.
  3. Therefore, anything goes in WPvP (within ToS). Players are free to WPvP in whatever way they like (within ToS), even if you disagree with that behaviour.
  4. Therefore, complain all you want, but no one has the right to tell another player how to WPvP, or abuse them in whisper chat or this forum. Players in WM make a conscious decision to enable it, and accept the consequences.
  5. Therefore, if a player doesn’t like the reality of WPvP, the problem is solved by turning off War Mode. As stated by Blizz: If you do not wish to engage in PvP combat, do not activate War Mode.
  6. Therefore, no changes are required to fundamentally change WPvP from what it’s always been, a gankathon. Enhancements such as new WPvP features or improved sharding are ofc welcome.

WPvP Ethics Survey

Don’t like the above challenge? Take an anonymous 10 question WPvP ethics survey instead. Takes about 2 mins.

4 Likes
2

Honestly. Most of the forum posts I see. People have double standards to it.
When I get 1v40 ganked = totally not fair. Blizz fix that and that maybe that. Cowards and so on.
When I am part of the 40v1 army = At best doesn’t bother to bring it up or ignores it. At worst = tries to even justify it.

As long as you are part of the swarm: All is good.
Once you become the victim = [Write in reason why its not fair here]. :rofl:

4 Likes
3

Yup.

Some players make up ethical WPvP rules and expect others to play by their rules. Breaking their precious rules, or standing up to them here, can often result in abuse.

Is that ethical or fair? It seems that in reality they are not concerned with ethics or fairness, just their injured egos when they get stomped in WPvP.

Worse, these rules vary from ethicist to ethicist, so they propose no clear rules anyway.

I’ve added a challenge to ethical WPvPers on the end of my op. Let’s see if any ethicists can beat the logic. Arkamedix gave the prototype in another thread a shot, brave effort… but the problem is when you say you agree with something, then right away say… ‘but’. So this version of the challenge is yes no only!

2 Likes
4

:angry:

My feelings get hurt every time :cry:

3 Likes
5

Tell me in wich post did i forced players to “follow my rules” ? The fact that i say about a group of players (in our case the alliance players) to be “cowards” or “un-ethical” , doesnt mean that i want them to follow my rules. Its a description. And that description iritates you, because its true. There is a difference between “description” and “follow my rules or else…” .

Players make a conscious decision to join WM because of the rewards. Not because they really want to WM. You can bark as much you want, but this is the truth.
Blizzard implemented PVE rewards into PVP content and this brought chaos and frustrations and dramas.
WoW is the only mmo i know , that has PVE rewards into PVP content.
Pitty that we cant know for sure, how woulded be today the wpvp content, if Blizzard woulded reward only honor and conquest since 8.0 started. I bet it woulded be a clean, challenging, fun wpvp enviroment. Not what it is now.

Why? Why i have no right to call you as you are? Dont we live in the era of the “freedom of speech” ? Or what ? We are in comunist era and i dont know?
Other people can describe my wpvp behaviour and criticize me. I dont mind. So why should i not be allowed to criticize others?

Yes, some changes are required. First change is to remove all rewards, so that there is no “motivation” for players to join. This will filter players that love wpvp from players that doesnt like wpvp, but they join because the rewards are there. Second, they should add only conquest/honor rewards and if in later patches/expansions they add pvp gear, then to give pvp gear as reward.Third, they should penalize players that atack “inferior” players (its not my case, because i play my main,but to protect both sides of drama). 4rth they should add more wpvp world quests (with motivational rewards, like 2000 honor or 200 conquest), where players meet a location and gank each-other or capture flags (some sort of open world battleground lets say), or add more wpvp quests that require you to kill certain classes/races and so on (the possibilities are limitless).
…

First of all i want to clarify that all my rants and anger regarding wpvp is not about my case. For thoose who doesnt know, i have a elemental shaman+ 3 stacks of ghost wolf. Basically, in wpvp, in almost 90% of my encounters with my enemies (the alliance) i either survive (if i am outnumbered) or i defeat my oponents (usually 1v1 or 2 against me). So, from my personal point of view, i am satisfied, because i have GoD MoDe and 95% of alliance players dont know how to kill me because they dont know how to play their classes.
And now, we go back to “cleaning the wpvp” enviroment: shaman is one of the easiest class to kill now, yet 95% of players dont even know that purge/dispell cancel’s ghost wolf. Theese players, who have 0 clue on how to play at least mediocre pvp, they join this enviroment and ruin it. That is my problem.
In PVE, Blizzard maded in such a way so that “noobs” to be “self-removed” from raids and dungeons. Why dont they do the same with this content?
I just made a BG half a hour ago vs 4 shamans from alliance. Not even one of them purged me the entire bg, although shaman’s purge has 0 sec cooldown. Theese are the players that iritates me.
I dont claim that i am a perfect pvp player, i consider myself a medium pvp player. But i have at least the minimum knowledge to defeat most (not all) of classes in 1v1.
Theese “so called bellow mediocre” players, that have 0 clue about the wpvp content, they join for rewards and ruin it. They go only in groups, parties, they atack only when they are in high numerical advantage, they sneak atack, etc. I agree that sneak atacks and unfair fights are part of the game. But when this repeats over and over again, its frustrating.
Personally i have almost 0 satisfaction from WM. What satisfaction can i have when 5 allies cant kill me because they are so noobs and cant use a simple spell? Or what satisfaction can i have when i beat allied rogues “like no problem” ?
The best way to “filter” this content is to change rewards.

6

Thanks for taking the time to respond to some of the challenge. Unfortunately you didn’t win, but like internet arguments, not an easy thing to do!

You can re-do it if you want. It would be good if you could just say Agree or Disagree below each point. Feel free to have your opinion below that in each point quoted in full. You could still win!

Since you ignored “1. There are no Blizz defined ethics rules in WPvP.” I assume you agree with that one.

For “2. Players are free to make up their own ethics rules, but other players have no obligation to follow those rules. Especially since made up rules inevitably vary from player to player.”

In the ethics challenge I said… “Players are free to make up their own ethics rules, but other players have no obligation to follow those rules. Especially since made up rules inevitably vary from player to player”.

Do you agree or disagree?

You ignored this one “3. Therefore, anything goes in WPvP. Players are free to WPvP in whatever way they like, even if you disagree with that behaviour”, but I assume you disagree… ?

For this one “4. Therefore, complain all you want, but no one has the right to tell another player how to WPvP, or abuse them in whisper chat or this forum. Players in WM make a conscious decision to enable it, and accept the consequences.” …

Abuse is against forum rules. Actual rules, not made up rules. As you know. Do what you want ofc, I don’t judge, minor consequences for you. But fact: it doesn’t help discussion. And it’s not very ethical.

Because you care about ethics. Have you ever heard the famous saying “Two wrongs don’t make a right”. That fits perfectly in your situation. Your ethics change depending on your situation. That is unethical. Which means you surely agree ethics are just about point of view.

That’s your opinion, not a fact.

You ignored this one " 5. Therefore, if a player doesn’t like the reality of WPvP, the problem is solved by turning off War Mode. As stated by Blizz: If you do not wish to engage in PvP combat, do not activate War Mode." but I assume you disagree.

For “6. Therefore, no changes are required to fundamentally change WPvP from what it’s always been, a gankathon. Enhancements such as new WPvP features or improved sharding are ofc welcome.”

Fair enough that is your opinion and you are entitled to it. I make suggestions myself, some are liked by a few people, others are… not. It’s good to put them out there though, fun to discuss. I’m all for improvements to WM. Looking forward to 8.2 new WM features.

We are here to discuss though. And when you resort to abusing anyone that disagrees, you are attempting to end the discussion by your force of will. May or may not work. But you don’t care it seems, because your ethics are flexible. That’s called being unethical.

But hey, you were making some points there, and not resorting to insults. This was a better discussion because of that. You can try again, and answer each point with Agree or Disagree, as explained in the rules. You can state your opinion below the agree or disagree. Need a clear answer, this is a good discussion, keep it going. We could get to the point where we see some of each others viewpoint. It’s possible! We’ll see :slight_smile:

1 Like
7

Who says that i didnt WIN? You? Who are you to decide if i won or not? Or how you “measure” a win? A win must be only if i agree with you? Explain?

Agree. There are no rules, because Blizzard didnt anticipated all the issues that will come: alliance turning off WM, alliance bribed with more bonus and 400ilvl gear, leechers joining groups and receiving rewards for being afk, and so on. Its a mistake that they done and now, because of the lack of staff and because they start to focus on other projects (especially mobile games), they leave WM how it is, without bothering to do something about it.
Does this answer satisfies you?

Agree. That doesnt mean that is right and ok how some players behave. As majority complained, this is a “ethical” issue, when players abuse the system. This is again Blizzard’s foult, they coulded prevent this by removing rewards and making this wpvp only for wpvp players, not for everyone. Also, they coulded add “penalisation” for players that kill players bellow their lvl/ilvl. Thatswhy, the other concepts of the game, for example pve raids, are only for pve players or mythic dungeon keys are only for pve hardcore players.

I agree. But still i dont get what you want to proove? Basically what you do here is presenting me the “Magna Carta Libertatum” to me, knowing from start that i cant disagree with a fundamental freedom of each player. You abuse this argument and you bring it in a broken feature of a game, to proove me that you are right. How pathetic you can be? That doesnt mean, that players freedom give them the right to be as#holes. And you basically want me to proove that it can be given this right.

Show me where is denied a player to do this:

Give me link with the exact words used in your quota. I want to see, if Blizzard added a rule like this, where i am not allowed to say to another player how to Wpvp.
So the link you will give, should be something like this:
“Players are forbidden to tell other players how to play in War Mode PVP, if they do so, they might be baned or what-ever” .

But does it help you to repeat the same thing over and over again, just because you know that your “enemy” will crack? Especially that you know that what i say is true? But you still deny the truth, and you continue with your “persistence” .

And this is how you try to use my “ethical” arguments about how WM should be against me. I like your style.
So…let me explain you bro: you confuse “critique” and “description” with “behaviour” . Each person, according to the Magna Carta Libertatum ( if we already are using this types of arguments, why not? ) has the right to criticize, say a opinion, express his feeling,etc…how they want. This is a fundamental right of every person living on our planet.
Now lets go to “opinions” and how you confuse a opinion with a insult. If i say about you that you are a noob, thats a opinion. If i say that i want to f### your mom, thats a insult. But because you are from the “snowflake” generation, you consider any “negative” opinion as rude. I noticed that this type of “snowflake” behaviour is very popular in countries like UK, Sweden, Norway,etc. People are educated to be “polite” and never express a negative opinion, because that negative opinion can be interpreted as a insult.
All the words i used to describe you in the past, ex: retard(a person who has a mental disability or low intelligence), idiot (a person with low intelligence), noob (a person who is inexperienced in a particular sphere or activity, especially computing or the use of the Internet),etc, if we both look in the dictionary, they are classified as “adjectives” ,words to describe a person. They are not classified as “insulting” words. Some snowflake countries, decided that words like retard are “often used as a general term of abuse” wich if we go to its origin, is incorrect. Because the origin of the word retard is : re (wich in latin means back ) and tardus (wich in latin means slow), therefor resulting the word retardus (wich in latin means bakcslow, word used to describe people who react slow or have low intelligence). If i woulded use the words: “you have low intelligence” instead of “retard” , that woulded be classified as a insult? The fact that you live in a “snowflake” enviroment and you take them as insult, its not my foult bro. Be a man, be logical, be analityc. Dont be dramatic and find drama in every word used.
All my words used by me in the past, where not insults. I choosed very carefully each word and i know the real meaning of each word. Nowadays people “bend” words to fit their arguments, like you do.
So if we go logical and according to dictionary, i didnt insulted nobody. The fact that i was banned by Blizzard for some past comments i gaved, it happend because each one of us interpret words how we want. But few of us, take the word how exactly it is. That the current problem in our society in modern times.
So after explaining you all of this, now i hope you understand that i was a “ethical” person and i didnt bullied and insulted nobody. Its a matter of interpretaion.
Now going to behaviour, yes, untill recently i was quite a “ethical” player: very rarely i atacked lower lvl/ilvl players, very rarely i atacked players that where in numerical disadvantage, i didnt atacked players that where 30% hp while fighting elites on maps, etc. But, alliance doesnt play by theese rules. So i decided to play by alliance rules, not by my rules.

Its a fact and you deny it. Everyone knows that if today Blizz removes all WM rewards, the wpvp population will go half, if not more.
Why do you think Blizz added theese rewards? They knew that nobody would like to pvp in open world for nothing to gain,except satisfaction. So thatswhy they added the rewards and bonuses.

How you enjoy to use others quotas in your arguments. What a little sneaky rat you are…

Ohhh ,wait …what? I am entitled? Omg…thats amazing. Thank you.

How? Did i threaten you that i come to your house and kill you if you dont agree me? Or what i did? Explain me how i “enforce” my will.
And please, dont go to the “so-called rude words” topic. I just explained above their real meaning.

But how is it that you always want clear answers, but you dont give clear answers?

8

Lol, I have to check myself for this repeatedly. Every CtA - I get in a group and start hunting. I do not engage anything less than 120 unless they’re getting stuck in to our group so, to a certain extent, I’ve some kind of code. But if you’re alone, afk, getting beasted by 100 mobs - I don’t care, yer gettin it.

But as soon as 2 or more people attack me I’m all “RAAAAGE YOU COWARDLY COUNTS IMMA HUNT YOU ALLLL NIGHHHHHHHHTTT!!!”

It’s a funny thing, pride. :smiley:

Historically I played on a pvp server from launch, and very rarely fired the first shot outside of a vendetta. But my eyes were always peeled and if you jumped me then it was game on and I would drop questing immediately to devote my time to you. I never complained about it though. It is what it is.

On topic side-story: one of the most memorable 1v1 wpvp moments I can recall was in classic and my party was heading to Uldaman. I was just ahead of everyone on my legionnaire warrior and as I cut in to the valley leading to the dungeon there was this lone dwarf pally, just sitting outside on his mount. We just stared at each other, sun in our eyes, for must’ve been half a minute and like a wild west movie you just knew “it was on…”.

I pulled out my blue quality cleaver of awesomeness and confidently got ready to hand him his head… he utterly kicked my a$$ in about 15 seconds cause I was a keyturning nab back then. My party arrived just as I died and started to get stuck in. I shouted “No!” so they stopped, and when I got back to my corpse I rezzed, he saluted me, and off he rode peacefully through the dust.

Sniff. That will always stick with me that tender wee moment.

2 Likes
9

Just a little joke, I added some ‘rules’ to the challenge above the list. It was not about agreeing, but either fully agreeing or fully disagreeing with all the points.

The idea behind my points was to see at what point disagreement happens. First point is deliberately very clear. But the next point in the list is meant to be a, “if you agree to the previous point, surely you agree to this point” situation. So it’s interesting where the disagreement starts.

So you agree on…

  • In WPvP there are no blizz rules.
  • Players are free to make their own rules and not follow others rules.
  • Anything goes in wpvp.

Then you stop the agree or disagree part, shame, but I assume it’s disagree for rest of points.

So at this point you disagree? That’s interesting isn’t it? Having agreed to the previous points?

  1. Therefore, complain all you want, but no one has the right to tell another player how to WPvP, or abuse them in whisper chat or this forum. Players in WM make a conscious decision to enable it, and accept the consequences.

Abuse is against rules as defined in forum code of conduct.

Do you disagree?

There is no link, this is just my opinion. Do you disagree?

Ye see, the sticking point is what we have found, the rest of the points don’t matter until the sticking point is agree or disagree. So do you agree or disagree on point 4?

There is a snowflake culture for sure. I am not personally offended by your words. Just pointing out that it’s considered abuse in actual rules.

For your point on wm on players only doing it for pve bonus, it sounded like you meant all wm players. Sure it’s probably a lot.

I try to respond to points, but sometimes there’s just too much. We are both doing big long posts. That was part of why I wrote the ethics challenge. A clear step by step agree disagree test. And it resulted in us finding a sticking point, which can then be discussed. Rather than big long posts on same stuff, we both do it :smiling_face:

I find the ethics side of WPvP quite interesting, am hoping others will try the ethics challenge.

1 Like
10

Afaik there isn’t any exception for points like “disruptive gameplay” for WPvP, thus I disagree with this point.

Your other 5 points need point 1 to be “true”/“agree”, so I don’t need to go further into them :slight_smile:

1 Like
11

See this is interesting, the sticking point people get to.

Okay you are stuck on point 1.

My reasoning for point 1, is that based on Blizz’s support article about harassment in WPvP, there is no problem with corpse camping, ganking, etc in Blizz’s rules. Their official line is, we don’t want pvp harassment reports and if you don’t like it don’t turn on wm.

Disruptive gameplay, to my understanding, is not relevant when it comes to player versus player combat unless exploits are involved.

To be clear, regardless of whether you agree on Blizz’s stance, the agree or disagree is on the point that it is or isn’t their stance. The reason I am quoting Blizz is simply to establish the official stance, before we get into player stance on ethics.

Edit: I reworded point 1 and added clarifications in other points. Each point needs to be worded so that an agree or disagree answer is possible. Ofc put your reason for your answer and any ‘buts’ after.

1 Like
12

We can all tell that your ethical consideration for others was just thrown out of the window by someone close to you… maybe your parents dunno, but, what is important is for you to understand that:
It is not made up rules… It is simple ethics, if you do not have them then you are simply ignorant and in my opinion just false, like do you get the satisfaction of killing someone in a 5v1 or do are you satisfied when you get killed 5v1? There is no point in doing your “test” (even though it really is not a test at all it is your trying to justify that you cannot do anything in world PvP unless you are in a party or a raid) as it completely going against the community. NOT against blizzard, do not get them and their quotes here, but again against the community. Most of the community is unhappy with uneven sharding, horde is unhappy with AOO quest and Alliance is unhappy that horde wins more battleground (AND THIS IS A FACT LITERALLY, THEY HAD TO GIVE ALLIANCE ADVANTAGE, WRATH - ISLE OF CONQUEST AS AN EXAMPLE) . Your justification is hiding behind the TOS and behind your own morals… which is fine, but do not go on and try to make others understand you as trust me, no one really cares about what you have to say as everyone has their own opinion…
People that come to forums are tired. We are “most abusive in game chat and on this forum” cause we actually care about the game. We want everyone to have fun, and no one to feel like an NPC “Legend of Azeroth”. We come here cause we are mad at something that is unjust, we are pissed at that fact.
All in all, due to your arrogance and lack of empathy you do not see yourself and other people as PEOPLE that feel emotion and play the game, instead you see NPCs and punching bags… which is kind of sad if you ask me…

BTW. Yes I was kind of passive-aggressive and sozz about that but after reading everything you wrote on both this and my post, I am sorry bud I think these are the words that I found most suitable.

PS. People can tell you are a recent player, just saying.

13

No, you are not, this is a direct attack :blush:

What does this mean?
Google can’t help me with this :confused:

2 Likes
14

Are you a lawyer? Only lawyers use theese types of “tactics” to proove their point of view.
So , to legalize “abusive” and “as#hole” behaviour, you bring as arguments ideeas that are similar with the “freedoms of human rights” . How can you be so devious to use such a tactic?
You asked some questions, that fundamentaly nobody cant disagree and you incorporated theese “freedoms” in a broken system, to proove that the system works and that is perfect.
Beside that you avoid a clear and detailed asnwer to everything i brought as argument.
You accused me to be “un-ethical” in forums , because i used “rude words” (in your point of view) , wich in reality i prooved that thoose words , originaly have no “offensive” meaning and that is up to each person how it takes the word.
After the “language” proof, you gave just a small answer:

Without admitting or denying if i was right or not. Because we both know i was right. So ,when you are put in a situation to agree with someone, you avoid the answer and turn the conversation to different topic or go back to your ideeas.
Then you accused me that i broke a Blizzard rule:

Then i asked you a proof:

Ofc…as usual, you didnt haved, so you gaved me a long list of rules:

And nowhere in that list is written that a player is forbidden to “tell other player how to play wpvp” .
So in both acusations , you where wrong.

You dont try. You simply avoid a direct answer to anything i bring as argument. Period.

Ohhh…how nice. Exactly what i was complaining about (corpse camping and atacking lower hp players), is confirmed by Blizzad.
“The following actions may be considered dishonorable” .
They used another word, “dishonorable” , but it has the same meaning with “un-ethical” .
So basically, with that link, you broke your entire post. You wanted to proove how “ethical” the wpvp is and Blizz just denied your points of view. I love when someone is “self-harming” himself.

This …and this:

Should make you (Vaeyn) rethink your point of view regarding WM.

And you are right. I feel like a punching bag that cant be killed because of the broken system. Lukcy that i am a “immortal” punching bag. xD

It means that Vaeyn have 0 clue on how “normality” is and how wpvp is in other games or was in WoW in previous expansions. What we got not, isnt the “Vanilla” world pvp that it was before. What we got now is a “massacre” style of wpvp, where wich one has a bigger group wins. There is no honor, ethics, fairplay, nothing. Its a “meat-fest” full with “gore” , similar with Diablo, where you go and kill everything in your path. That isnt real wpvp.

15

Got it, thanks for answer :slight_smile:

16

Nope.

The purpose of the points was not to force you to agree, and it’s impossible to prove anything when it’s all just point of view. If you agree, but there’s a but, that’s fine. It’s just interesting to see what points people have an issue on.

That other guy won’t even attempt it, at least you gave it a shot. Thanks :smiling_face:

That’s a partial quote from my op, not an accusation on you. I got a few minutes of whispers yesterday telling me to not do what I was doing though.

You asked for a link I gave it, the rules are on that page. Under the " Harassing or Defamatory" heading. I guess those rules are what got you banned on the forum, proof that they exist.

You are confused, the link is code of conduct, as requested. I did say there was no Blizz rule I know of that specifically says you can’t tell a player what to do, but I suppose it would just come under the harassment heading if abusive language was used.

I know, they state that dishonorable behaviour is not against the rules. That was my point. Ethics is left to the player to decide.

This could be considered defamatory. Is it ethical to talk to me like that?

You play the game how you want, no problem. How I play is my concern. The problem is when the ethical victims (no names), harass players just pvping, and in doing that harassment, are being unethical. Hypocrisy.

You sound very bitter.

Been playing since 2007 on and off. Still a noob and having fun. But so what if I was new? Are you a newphobe? Not very ethical.

1 Like
17

We all look at wpvp in different way. But holyF remove the wm sh!t and bring back the old servers

1 Like
18

Couldn’t care less. I will keep on corpse camping, killing loners while I’m in a group, killing lowbies and their quest NPCs even if all that was against TOS. I believe most players wouldn’t bother to report.

3 Likes
19

Then why you started this thread?
And why you used that “Magna Carta” drama style of topic to to ask about the “ethics” of wpvp?
Instead to use this devious tactic,where you added some “un-deniable” arguments, because basically if someone denies them is actually denying the basics freedom we have as humans, you coulded make the post like this:
Hy dear forum users. I want to know if some aspects of the current wpvp are ethical or not. I give some examples and the only thing you need to do is to agree or disagree with each point:
1. Is it ethical to camp a corpse and harras a player?
2. Is it ethical to gank 5v1 a player?
3. Is it ethical to sneak atack a player that has 30% hp while he is fighting a elite?
Leave your answers with agree or disagree at each point.

But NO. Instead to do it straight to the subject, you started to “bend” your argument by bringing craps about “human freedoms” , “Magna Carta” and so on, knowing from the start that thoose types of arguments cant be denied. You “altered” your arguments going from obvious conclusion to the next obvious conclusion, hoping that if you push the topic on this subject (“freedoms”), people will agree (wich obviously happend, because only a crazy guy can deny a “freedom”) and therefor win your argumentation.
You where frustrated because I and many onthers, openly atack on forum the “un-ethical” behaviour of the alliance players and the “unfairness” of how Blizzard choosed to help a so-called outnumbered faction. You cant and dont want to admitt the truth that is front of you :

  1. Actual War Mode concept is broken in almost all aspects (quests,invasions,sharding,scalling,un-ethical, and may more).
  2. You refuse to accept that the ratio between horde and alliance population is almost equal and balanced in the EU region, the number of players exist but the number of players with WM activated doesnt exist. You also refuse to give a answer or opinion why majority of alliance players dont or refuse to activate WM.
  3. You refuse to accept that majority of the wpvp comunity dislikes the current status of the WM. You also refuse to accept that 80% of the opinions/reviews/comments on the WM forum section are negative or full of complains.
  4. You refuse to accept the unfairness of how Blizzard is helping the alliance, although there is no real reason. Yes, i would agree the alliance to receive help (bonuses,extra quests,extra gear,etc) if the total population ratio between horde and alliance would be 80% or something like that in favor for the horde. But when all sites and all statistics say that the ratio is 51% and 49% alliance,almost equal, i dont see the logic to favor a faction just for 1% difference.
  5. You refuse to accept that the alliance players are more “un-ethical” and more “abusive” in wpvp than horde players. Even if majority of complains in the forum, of un-ethical behavior are about alliance players.
    …
    So, who is enforcing who? From what i see, by using this “freedom drama” tactic, you try to enforce the beauty and perfection of the current WM status in the game. You opened countless posts on forum to convince the comunity how awesome WM is, you disagree anyone that complains or criticize the WM, you deny any proof received and most important: you dont answer directly to the topic. You always, either change the topic in your favor or avoid the answer. I read all posts made in WM forum in the last 4-5 months. Everytime a player comes with a complain, you target him and contradict him, even if he is a alliance player.
    IF YOU REALLY WANT TO PROOVE SOMETHING, ANSWER THAT BORDERED QUOTA, THOOSE 3 QUESTIONS WITH AGREE OR DISAGREE.
    Even Blizzard admitted that thoose types of behaviours are considered abuse/harrasment/dishonorable/un-ethical.

In case you didnt knew, Blizzard forum and games have a system in wich if a player is reported by several persons, that player is auto-banned by the system. Obviously my past bans where the result of some snowflakes that felt hurt by the truth, including you and CoolioSlave.

You didnt. You accused me that i want to enforce and teach other how to play. The fact that i mock people who cant kill a shaman, doesnt mean that i want to teach them. It simply means i mock them. Why? Because everyone knows what a paper-hero the shaman is without ghostwolf. It was not directly, but obviously after our contradictions and my mockery, i realised that this quota was targeting me:

…now you remember? What is wrong with you? Yesterday you give a statement, today you deny your own statement??? Are you a person “with low intelligence” ??? I hope now i used the proper “non-offensive” words and that you dont report me for this humble question.

You “suppose” too much. You like to “interpret” everything only how you wish and to bend what others say to fit your arguments or your dramatic personality. You find in every “critique” against you a rudeness, a offense, a harrasment, a abuse, etc. You dont belive me? Look:

In case you didnt knew, what this guy wanted to say:

…was the following:
He, as me also, are tired of your “persistence” to invade this forum and preach us how awesome the WM is,while 80% of the WM comunity is not satisfied. You dont care about other people’s opinions and as i said above, you always start new posts to “praise” the WM or contradict each person that complains. In his point of view, this is considered harrasment. Harassment= lack of ethic.
Now going to the “parents drama” ,where you already took it as a offensive atack, he meant that your “abusive persistence” or “insistence” is maby inherited from your parents. Let me give you a example: a small kid is stealing a candy at the store. He is caught and the staff lady is asking the kid : “From where did you learned to steal? From your parents?” . Does that mean the staff lady is offensive or she just wants to know whats going on with this kid?
I didnt found nothing offensive in that phrase he said above. He didnt insulted you, he didnt insulted your parents, he just said a opinion, that you took as a offence.
And there are plenty of examples to show, where others opinions about you where taken as offensive atacks against you. I dont have the pacience and time now to scroll the entire forum to search for examples, but you know what i speak. You have a unique style to present your arguments, wich most of them i must admitt, they are polite and diplomatic, but this style is very annoying. Its very persistent, insistent, often. Its like you try to convince us that cigarettes are good, something like that. You understand what i want to explain?

You talk about hipocrisy? About ethical victims and harrasment? When you had the chance to fight vs me alone but you choosed to lure me to your group and then 10 of your group jumped on me to kill me? Who was in our case the victim? You?

Ops, a ally player is not satisfied about WM. Go jump on him, explain him that cigarettes are good…

20

You didn’t quote in full, see original for the explanation I already gave.

Because it’s interesting to see how ethicists respond, it’s a challenge. They can agree or disagree, simple. Their explanation of their answer allows them to state their view.

I may well make another post on your suggested questions. In this post I’m more interested in mindset than data though.

No they didn’t. They use the word dishonorable, but specifically state that tactics such as corpse camping are legitimate pvp.

Yes I did, the above was my response.

You quoted a point from the challenge. Like I said, the challenge is for everyone not you specifically, and it’s not an accussation.

Like I said, you are quoting the challenge point. That sentence is a general statement, not aimed specifically at you.

The point of the op was player’s interpretation of ethics in WPvP. They each have their own ethics standard, that they interpreted from vague unwritten rules, adding in their own standards. Leading to variable player rules. There are no game rules. Just thousands of different variations of player interpreted rules.

It would be interesting to see the variety of rules. It would only be forum dwellers rules ofc. Thx for the idea!

I’m actually very interested in other people’s opinions. But I firmly believe every opinion must be challenged, even mine.

I simply asked a question, and you have stated your opinion. Thanks. Another person could have a different opinion, or a slight variation on yours. That’s the trouble with ethics, it’s not a fixed rule.

They are very bad.

That was not hipocrisy, because my standpoint has always been anything goes. It would be hipocrisy if I had maintained a moral highground, and then did that.

This is a good discussion, it’s hard to respond to all the points in long posts. If you want an answer to a specific point, do a post asking just one question and you’ll get an answer.

But no need to quote things out of context. Just a waste of your time, because my answer is just gonna be, you quoted that out of context.

1 Like