Lets talk (civilized) about "honor". | Forums

[Cyb3rR4ptor]

Those who play with "No Honor" actually have a higher skill than those whose "honor code" forbids them from pushing off ledges, using "cheesy" strategies or ganking.
Why? The playes who play with "no honor" do not limit themselves by any means. They adapt and make best with everything that is provided, which is a sign of skill. In a broad time period it will lead them to the ability of winning without pushing off edges, without ganking or using cheesy strategies. Their ability to adapt with no limits will provide a broader experience, learning and sense of anticipating the entire match to such a degree that they can win easily without pushing off the edge or using cheesy tactics.

And also, One can also say that there is more respect on fighting a "no honor" players than someone who plays with some sort of "honor" code.
Why?
Not finishing your opponent. Either by pushing him off an edge when you clearly could or using some sort of "cheesy" tactic. Can be seen as a sign of "dishonor" or "disrespect". You are not treating your opponent as a true threat. You do not see him as your equal, because if so, you would understand that the player has the capacity to actually win. But no, you disregarded it and let him live because you are confident that your "skill" is greater than his and you wish prolong the fight for your own amusement. You are basically underestimating your opponent. And that is a a flaw.

So never, ever, let your opponent live. It will more often than not be your undoing.

[itsPlanB]

Yeah haven't you seen Saving Private Ryan??

So never, ever, let your opponent live. It will more often than not be your undoing.

[Starcanum]

Those who play with "No Honor" actually have a higher skill than those whose "honor code" forbids them from pushing off ledges, using "cheesy" strategies or ganking.
Why? The playes who play with "no honor" do not limit themselves by any means. They adapt and make best with everything that is provided, which is a sign of skill. In a broad time period it will lead them to the ability of winning without pushing off edges, without ganking or using cheesy strategies. Their ability to adapt with no limits will provide a broader experience, learning and sense of anticipating the entire match to such a degree that they can win easily without pushing off the edge or using cheesy tactics.

That actually doesn't make too much of a sense if you think of it. Those who don't have any kind of "code" won't mind using the cheesy tactics etc. as long as it brings them the win, so they'll have less room to progress. Those who handicap themselves have less overall power, so it leaves them with less space for an error if they still want to win, making their progress faster and more certain. Of course I'm talking about the people who only impose the code to themselves and are aware that people won't follow their code. There're also people who are all "pro-honor" and then complain about people who aren't honorable in their eyes. Of course you see more of them on forums because the first kind of honorable players don't have a reason to complain on forums. So for those people it's true, they'll rather make a positional mistake and then excuse it with some bs like "my enemies weren't honorable" and stuff than admit their fault. There's no honor in acting like this, so they actually turn out as the dishonorable ones.

[Cyb3rR4ptor]

That actually doesn't make too much of a sense if you think of it. Those who don't have any kind of "code" won't mind using the cheesy tactics etc. as long as it brings them the win, so they'll have less room to progress. Those who handicap themselves have less overall power, so it leaves them with less space for an error if they still want to win, making their progress faster and more certain. Of course I'm talking about the people who only impose the code to themselves and are aware that people won't follow their code. There're also people who are all "pro-honor" and then complain about people who aren't honorable in their eyes. Of course you see more of them on forums because the first kind of honorable players don't have a reason to complain on forums. So for those people it's true, they'll rather make a positional mistake and then excuse it with some bs like "my enemies weren't honorable" and stuff than admit their fault. There's no honor in acting like this, so they actually turn out as the dishonorable ones.

And that's they key of my point. Yes there is little room for learning and progress, because they don't see a need for it. But a well versed and skilled person in any pvp game will know that cheesy tactics will soon have a counter to them. Once people learn to counter Cheesy Tactic A, there will be a need for another cheesy tactic and soon Cheesy Tactic B and C arrive. It happens with every game. Given enough time all tactics lose their "cheese" why? Because there is now a broad variety of tactics, strategies and ways to play and since all of them are basically cheesy, none of them are. And this is where the "honor" player starts to fall behind. Because while the "dishonorable" players are coursing trough the entire flow of the game overcoming every limit that shows, the "honorable" player sits by in his own slow pace. Yes he will know a lot and has a lot of skill as long as it's, inside his comfort zone.

Right now the game is in it's early stage and the "cheesy" tactics are few but there is plenty of time for a true meta to take place. Once it does, the anti meta shows up. And the game starts to truly spin around in a Rock/Paper/Scissors fashion. Give it a few months and hopefully, HOPEFULLY, we will see a wide spectrum of "cheesy" tactics and a lot of salt

[Starcanum]

And that's they key of my point. Yes there is little room for learning and progress, because they don't see a need for it. But a well versed and skilled person in any pvp game will know that cheesy tactics will soon have a counter to them. Once people learn to counter Cheesy Tactic A, there will be a need for another cheesy tactic and soon Cheesy Tactic B and C arrive. It happens with every game. Given enough time all tactics lose their "cheese" why? Because there is now a broad variety of tactics, strategies and ways to play and since all of them are basically cheesy, none of them are. And this is where the "honor" player starts to fall behind. Because while the "dishonorable" players are coursing trough the entire flow of the game overcoming every limit that shows, the "honorable" player sits by in his own slow pace. Yes he will know a lot and has a lot of skill as long as it's, inside his comfort zone.

Right now the game is in it's early stage and the "cheesy" tactics are few but there is plenty of time for a true meta to take place. Once it does, the anti meta shows up. And the game starts to truly spin around in a Rock/Paper/Scissors fashion. Give it a few months and hopefully, HOPEFULLY, we will see a wide spectrum of "cheesy" tactics and a lot of salt

I understand what you mean by the meta changing, but what I don't understand is your claim about the honorable players sitting in his own slow pace. He's still forced to find an answers to the metagame while he has less options at his disposal, they too have to adapt and learn. If you're saying the "dishonorable" player will have his cheesy tactic rendered useless eventually anyway, then wouldn't the "honorable" one essentially be even faster in learning as he wouldn't waste time on relying on that technique in the first place?

[B3NNS]

It's a game take your salt somewhere else, get into the salt business and do something productive.

[Brave_Thunder]

I agree. But what you've said here doesn't account for you ACTUALLY attacking your teammate. It's a simple thing. You're actually doing the one thing that is frowned upon by EVERYONE. You're purposefully attacking your teammate because he did something YOU didn't like. I personally hope they report you. That's griefing. They may be doing something you don't personally like. That's a you problem. Your attacking them. That's a game problem.

So to spin this differently where is the line on attacking a player on your team. I'm in Dominion and holding Zone C. I call for help and my teammate runs past to B. He doesn't help me. Can I just start attacking him because he didn't do what I wanted?

Tecnically,yes,you could do that.But doing so you are effectively limiting his options.He wasn't blocking you from doing nothing,here is the difference between mine and your example.

[Cyb3rR4ptor]

Yeah haven't you seen Saving Private Ryan??

Yes, I have. Many times.

[Cyb3rR4ptor]

I understand what you mean by the meta changing, but what I don't understand is your claim about the honorable players sitting in his own slow pace. He's still forced to find an answers to the metagame while he has less options at his disposal, they too have to adapt and learn. If you're saying the "dishonorable" player will have his cheesy tactic rendered useless eventually anyway, then wouldn't the "honorable" one essentially be even faster in learning as he wouldn't waste time on relying on that technique in the first place?

The reason why a "honorable" player will have a slower pace will be because of the limited approach. While they come up with a strategy to play the meta inside their code, the "no honor" will probably find a solution in less time since there is no limit on how to deal with it.

Here is an example. Let's say X character has a **** ton of health and the best way to beat him is by pushing him off an edge. In this situation if your "honor" code forbids you from pushing others off the edge then you would have to create a whole play style in order to fight that character.

It is something very situational really it would all depend on what is the current meta game running. What if the meta shows up a "cheesy" tactic that can only be defeated by methods which your code forbids? You are faced with the decision of abandoning your code and win. Or stick your code and lose with dignity.

[itsPlanB]

I must have missed where you were blocked from something in your example.

Tecnically,yes,you could do that.But doing so you are effectively limiting his options.He wasn't blocking you from doing nothing,here is the difference between mine and your example.