Dear Jorb, Loftar and Alay

[NOOBY93]

You can't really blame hearthlings. That's like making a PvPmode=true Minecraft server then banning people who kill others. If you're gonna make a game, you can only blame yourself for the bad things that happen in it. The hearthlings just use the game.
And Jorb, the point wasn't that he wants crashing servers to be possible. Point was, fix the goddamn bug with scents crashing the server instead of giving hearthlings penalty for leaving them.
I vouch for removing scents, claims!

I think you're forgetting that the game is a social experiment

It's a social experiment to see politics, not to see how much people abuse the exploits.
Perfect example of social experiments? The point system. Trading system. Something that went off so well still surprises me. I can port to anyone's village, even enemies', without fearing death, because it's for trading purposes. Point system is crazy, just how advanced it is and how EVERYONE respects it. That's a social experiment.
This isn't: You make bugs, people use it. You don't even need to experiment to know people will abuse bugs. Nothing new. Fix dem bugs and start thinking about the REAL social stuff. Wars, alliances, trading. That's the good part. Bugs need to go.

[jordancoles]

You can't really blame hearthlings. That's like making a PvPmode=true Minecraft server then banning people who kill others. If you're gonna make a game, you can only blame yourself for the bad things that happen in it. The hearthlings just use the game.
And Jorb, the point wasn't that he wants crashing servers to be possible. Point was, fix the goddamn bug with scents crashing the server instead of giving hearthlings penalty for leaving them.
I vouch for removing scents, claims!

I think you're forgetting that the game is a social experiment

It's a social experiment to see politics, not to see how much people abuse the exploits.
Perfect example of social experiments? The point system. Trading system. Something that went off so well still surprises me. I can port to anyone's village, even enemies', without fearing death, because it's for trading purposes. Point system is crazy, just how advanced it is and how EVERYONE respects it. That's a social experiment.
This isn't: You make bugs, people use it. You don't even need to experiment to know people will abuse bugs. Nothing new. Fix dem bugs and start thinking about the REAL social stuff. Wars, alliances, trading. That's the good part. Bugs need to go.

A social experiment also consists of leaving gamebreaking bugs in to see how people will react to their existence.

[NOOBY93]

I think you're forgetting that the game is a social experiment

It's a social experiment to see politics, not to see how much people abuse the exploits.
Perfect example of social experiments? The point system. Trading system. Something that went off so well still surprises me. I can port to anyone's village, even enemies', without fearing death, because it's for trading purposes. Point system is crazy, just how advanced it is and how EVERYONE respects it. That's a social experiment.
This isn't: You make bugs, people use it. You don't even need to experiment to know people will abuse bugs. Nothing new. Fix dem bugs and start thinking about the REAL social stuff. Wars, alliances, trading. That's the good part. Bugs need to go.

A social experiment also consists of leaving gamebreaking bugs in to see how people will react to their existence.

pretty sure their goal wasn't to make exploits or not fix them to see how people will react.
That's why they're trying to fix them, eh?

[Jojjkano]

HAPPY BURTHDEY ALAY!

[jordancoles]

pretty sure their goal wasn't to make exploits or not fix them to see how people will react.
That's why they're trying to fix them, eh?

Trying to fix them after what, 2 years?

That's a decent timespan for a social experiment

[Ogrim]

Social experiment does NOT equal 'playtesting' the mechanics of the game. It has to do with human interaction using the game as the medium for that interaction.

You bot using game breakers are spoiled babies. STFU. No one cares about your rationalizations. No one buys them either.

No seriously. NO ONE.

[NOOBY93]

Social experiment does NOT equal 'playtesting' the mechanics of the game. It has to do with human interaction using the game as the medium for that interaction.

You bot using game breakers are spoiled babies. STFU. No one cares about your rationalizations. No one buys them either.

No seriously. NO ONE.

I don't bot, and my point is, if the game is bottable, people will bot. It's not the people's fault. The less botting is worth it, the less botters there will be...

[Ogrim]

Social experiment does NOT equal 'playtesting' the mechanics of the game. It has to do with human interaction using the game as the medium for that interaction.

You bot using game breakers are spoiled babies. STFU. No one cares about your rationalizations. No one buys them either.

No seriously. NO ONE.

I don't bot, and my point is, if the game is bottable, people will bot. It's not the people's fault. The less botting is worth it, the less botters there will be...

I completely disagree with this, however there is nothing wrong with some botting deterrent. I'd be okay with it.

Program a window that *randomly* pops up saying, "Bot check, if you are human click here" and has a 2 minute timer. If the button is not clicked then the account is deleted when the timer counts down to 0.

[LadyV]

First of all Happy Birthday Alay.

---------------------------------------------------
As for the secondary discussions, calm down. Haven and Salem have flaws amd probably always will to some degree. There is only so much two people can do at one time and your expectations should reflect that.

The bot issue...well what can I say. I've made my opinons on it known before. Ultimately it is up to each player whether they use them or not. The developers have not stopped their use. Still that being said it does not make it right. Bots do not get tired, need to rest, need to interact with a keyboard or mouse, and certainly do not get bored of repetition. They take the Human out of the game and reduce the efforts of people who don't use them. You can argue all you want about how its not forbidden and it saves time and strain on the body but it does not make it right to rake credit and benefit from not playing the game yourself.

The final death nail of this game will come from those that finally figure out how to bot combat. They won't need to have the bot ultra skilled or maneuverable. They will only simply have to have the ability to log in multiple bots to harass and kill a more skilled and maneuverable Human player. When that day comes it will be this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WCNORTE1ZQo

People who bot are not necessarily bad people but they do abuse the system just as much as bug abusers. You can not deny that. I still think many of them bright and talented people. However whats the point of player vs player when you add bots, scripts, programs... into it? It becomes man vs machine.

All of you who are going to be offended by this go ahead and vent it out. However; it is my view and you are not going to change it. So I shall not reply again.

[jordancoles]

Social experiment does NOT equal 'playtesting' the mechanics of the game. It has to do with human interaction using the game as the medium for that interaction.

You bot using game breakers are spoiled babies. STFU. No one cares about your rationalizations. No one buys them either.

No seriously. NO ONE.

Social experiments can be "playtesting" the mechanics of the game if that means they are interacting with eachother with no rules set around the mechanics. Just seeing what people do with the broken mechanics is in itself a social experiment.

Also lol you're mad