maraki
Member
This is a twink question, to be clear. Are there ethics to be followed when playing wow, specifically in bgs?
With the new imbalances in the 60 twink bracket and with exploit v. regular content gear, the question has really arisen whether there is a right or wrong way to play. I assume, the consequences for doing it wrong are somewhat academic. Nonetheless, let's look at it.
Is it fair for levelers to get one-shot and be ineffective in a one level (60) bg? This one seems easy. At 50s it was super clear, they needed to buy or work a little at getting gear. At 60s, it's not as easy. Nonetheless, buy 226 gear and at least learn your class before coming in a pvp battle. So, no, don't feel bad as a twink one-shotting levelers.
Should an exploit player see it as fair to one-shot a normal twink? Only in DF is this a question. The divide between exploiters (xfer characters that have pilfered DF gear and transfered their toon back to a previous xpac) and regular twinks ( i think we can just call them twinks: players that use current content to the best of their ability) have brought this question to the front of the debate. Well, and here is the argument, can you blame a player for finding the best possible way to win, even if its clearly exploiting? The answer is no. If given the opportunity, anyone would take it. Does that mean its ethical sound? Well... probably. And I say this from the bottom of my heart. If Blizz leaves the hole open and some clever exploiter jumps through, then it becomes part of the game.
What if the exploiters are grandfathered, like they are, and nobody else can do it? Now it's getting a little gray. The problem here is that you cant ask a 335 ilvl 60 to take off his gear - even though this seems to be what some of them are now doing.
So what is the ethical question? If you want good games, should you try to level the playing field given that Blizz leaves holes open (and then closing them)? I think you should, but giving up gear seems a little ... twink prohibitive.
Let me set something out there that maybe clarifies what position I have. I see a marked difference between agility players and automated players. The first is a player that clicks on the screen to make things happen. They are roughly called clickers. I am one of them. I know it is about my hand/eye coordination because when I die it is because I wan't fast enough. The latter, the automators, for a lack of better words, rely on the computer and their skill of programming, etc, to win. They click very little. The spells are bundled together in macros and the need for clicking is mitigated by faster keyboards (and key binds) and clever ways to set up automatic responses in such a way that the opponent becomes more lifeless than the automator. There is a huge difference here. In the first case, the player is doing the killing. In the second case, the player has enabled the computer to do the work for him. What does this mean? It means, herein, that another scenario, automation, becomes something we can call exploiting. Not that I would ever suggest that.
In the next post I will cover real ethical questions. How important is it to hate the other faction? And what will mixed faction bgs mean for this kind of tribalism. Also, and more importantly, what does it say about a twink that does these things: emotes, teabags, targets repeatedly, farms the gy, and, generally, talks a bunch of nonsense in the spirit of celebrating winning. And I will suggest that these things appear very different from clickers and regular twinks (which is to say are tolerable) than they appear from exploiters and automators (much less tolerable).
With the new imbalances in the 60 twink bracket and with exploit v. regular content gear, the question has really arisen whether there is a right or wrong way to play. I assume, the consequences for doing it wrong are somewhat academic. Nonetheless, let's look at it.
Is it fair for levelers to get one-shot and be ineffective in a one level (60) bg? This one seems easy. At 50s it was super clear, they needed to buy or work a little at getting gear. At 60s, it's not as easy. Nonetheless, buy 226 gear and at least learn your class before coming in a pvp battle. So, no, don't feel bad as a twink one-shotting levelers.
Should an exploit player see it as fair to one-shot a normal twink? Only in DF is this a question. The divide between exploiters (xfer characters that have pilfered DF gear and transfered their toon back to a previous xpac) and regular twinks ( i think we can just call them twinks: players that use current content to the best of their ability) have brought this question to the front of the debate. Well, and here is the argument, can you blame a player for finding the best possible way to win, even if its clearly exploiting? The answer is no. If given the opportunity, anyone would take it. Does that mean its ethical sound? Well... probably. And I say this from the bottom of my heart. If Blizz leaves the hole open and some clever exploiter jumps through, then it becomes part of the game.
What if the exploiters are grandfathered, like they are, and nobody else can do it? Now it's getting a little gray. The problem here is that you cant ask a 335 ilvl 60 to take off his gear - even though this seems to be what some of them are now doing.
So what is the ethical question? If you want good games, should you try to level the playing field given that Blizz leaves holes open (and then closing them)? I think you should, but giving up gear seems a little ... twink prohibitive.
Let me set something out there that maybe clarifies what position I have. I see a marked difference between agility players and automated players. The first is a player that clicks on the screen to make things happen. They are roughly called clickers. I am one of them. I know it is about my hand/eye coordination because when I die it is because I wan't fast enough. The latter, the automators, for a lack of better words, rely on the computer and their skill of programming, etc, to win. They click very little. The spells are bundled together in macros and the need for clicking is mitigated by faster keyboards (and key binds) and clever ways to set up automatic responses in such a way that the opponent becomes more lifeless than the automator. There is a huge difference here. In the first case, the player is doing the killing. In the second case, the player has enabled the computer to do the work for him. What does this mean? It means, herein, that another scenario, automation, becomes something we can call exploiting. Not that I would ever suggest that.
In the next post I will cover real ethical questions. How important is it to hate the other faction? And what will mixed faction bgs mean for this kind of tribalism. Also, and more importantly, what does it say about a twink that does these things: emotes, teabags, targets repeatedly, farms the gy, and, generally, talks a bunch of nonsense in the spirit of celebrating winning. And I will suggest that these things appear very different from clickers and regular twinks (which is to say are tolerable) than they appear from exploiters and automators (much less tolerable).
Last edited:
