Arti bombs are fine IMO.. In real war does anyone complain when countries take out satellite stations / anti-aircraft stations / missile silos / defensive encampments with airstrikes to make the impending ground assault softer? Soften up the enemy .. take em out.. Anybody who complains about ethics and earning respect .. wahhhh is all I have to say .. My only ISSUE with arti bombs is (and I have mentioned this in suggestions before) that my ship should be able to return fire on any ship that is launching artis on me and my procs (ie geminis, krios)have a chance to go off... so you launch 10 emps to soften up my defense at least you are being blasted by my ship 10 times with return fire...

And much like in real war people take out those much weaker than them. (Several people, mostly slow rankers discounted.)

I see this philosophy pop up from time to time, and usually my response is basically "grow up".

Look... if your ideal is simply to toe the line (that is stand your position face to face with the other guy and slug away in a pure test of muscle and toughness), and your measure of success is whether or not you come out on top because you have the bigger ship, the simple truth is that you're never going to test anything of real value.

In terms of psychology, the bully is the one who expects to be free of reprisals simply because he's bigger, and he usually goes berserk when somebody "cheats" by playing the game in a different way. The fighter on the other hand is at least partially a tactician, and his end goal is to do whatever it takes to gain his objective. There is no "honor" in simply being the bigger guy, but rather in how you do what you do in meeting the challenge of an opponent.

Don't like being "spammed" by artis? Play another game then. They're in the game for a reason, that being an equalizer. It makes it possible for the guy with less in game time to have a decent shot at firing back if he takes a while to save up the artifacts.

Tell me how your philosophy is better? When people say what they think is law and anyone's opinion against it is inferior and therefore they are wrong, usually my response is basically grow up. Everything in this game is usually "Don't like x? Play another game then." For example:

Don't like being zeroed? Play another game then.
Don't like using artis? Play another game then.
Don't like being attacked? Play another game then.

Actions are in the game for a reason, anyone has the ability to zero anyone for whatever reason. One disable/raid/hack is regarded as "etiquette" because people are delicate flowers who we can't hurt too much. Everyone has a different definition for honor, whether it be sticking it to the man, being a law-abiding citizen or having the most of something.
(This post wouldn't have been so negative if you had left out the last paragraph)

Short Version: There is no such thing as a clean fight. You go in to win.

^^ Music to my ears! You said it just right.

Myself, I tend to hold to follow the dont use artifacts line of thinking.

War, gloves come off. Someone uses them first, then they have chosen the rules of engagement, and I will use them. If you need to use artifacts in retaliation, so be it.

But for random battle tab hits? Man up and do it properly. To me, if you spam someone with artifacts in the name of efficiency you are telling them exactly one thing - all you are is a resource to be used on the way to badges, and not a player who's ship I have combated. If someone does this to me, it shows they have exactly 0 respect for me, and that upsets me.

There are some situations I tend to relax these rules (such as exotica, which I consider a permenant state of war) but as a general explanation of my feelings about artifacts, this will suffice unless someone wants to debate it

debate.jpg does not count as a structured counter-argument

But in all honesty, its an argument about efficiency vs respect. It can not be 'won', simply lived.

Going for efficiency with debuffs is, well, more efficient, of course. But you know, I LIKE being a gentleman. I LIKE taking people on fairly as possible, with only the sheer hours and work put into our ships over years differentiating our power. I like being able to say i met someone fairly, and proved victorious. I feel that taking someone on fairly shows respect for both their strength and work making their ship.

And you know, its got its darkside as well, because I LIVE for crushing people knowing its a pure one on one, with my ship anihilating everyone in its path. When the modifiers are removed, the debuffs are gone, the buffs are turned off, my ship is just STRONGER. And destroying you at your best just makes it all the sweeter.

Even if bbatty feels it proves nothing, its sure as hell fun.

And if its war, I drop all of that and crush all foes using every method available to me. Because war is serious buisness, but random battle tab hits are duels against an opponent almost always at a natural disadvantage. The very least you can do is not poison them before the match.

So in the end, i counter my own argument. My cries of respect may be overwhelmed by my battlemania. In the end though, i fight my opponents at their best, and have fun doing so.

And you get badges faster.

Who really wins this argument? nobody. But now my point of view is known

Well said. And I have no real disagreement with any of it. I will only add two other thoughts.

The concept of fairness you spoke of could be viewed in a number of ways. For instance, it would be fair for the lower rank to spam the higher rank since it is possible the only difference in the ship is the fact one person started before another. Yes there are slow rankers, but I mean real new players who entered the game in the last 6 months or in the last year. My 2 years plus gives me a superior advantage that has nothing to do with a test of skill in out developing their ship. That would be like saying, I am going to run a 100 yard dash, but you get a 50 yard head start, then you get to seem like a fair gentleman when you beat me to the end of the line; but I am a bad guy for (legally) throwing a rock to trip you up.

I likewise think it is fair to use in game artifacts to balance the field against those who have more money to spend. Again, just because I have the ability to buy Radiant Surge Cannon - Mark IX or Come At Me Bro Trinity-Core Drives doesn't mean I have spent hours of labor to out play you; it just means I have more cash. Thus, spamming even during "duels" could be fair and respectful.


I agree with you that this is a non winnable debate. The tactics and players are too wide ranging. It is just an expression of ideas. Here (again) is my basic stance.

1. It's a game. Do what you like for fun.
2. Screw anyone else's idea of battlefield etiquette.
3. ^Moderated only by legion rules of conduct.
4. Return all attacks, if artifacts used against me, use equal measure in reply
5. Battle tab= I am buffed and just attack them.
6. Alert logs= I am buffed, they are slightly debuffed (though not with CM).
7. War alerts= I am buffed, they are spammed and zeroed.
8. Base defense= temporary defacto war stance, they are spammed and zeroed.

What bugs me is when I disable someone, and a a little bit later, they fire a containment missile at me but they know they can't take me down.
I will warn them about it and then let it go the first time. If you want to attack me, disable me. Don't just nerf me, especially, since I've already gotten my badges.

After that warning, if they persist, I'd start wailing on them. That usually doesn't happen though.

This too has come up several times and the logic of it blows my mind. How in the world can people be more offended by a singular debuffing missile than from being actually shot down? I mean seriously. You blew up their ship. You presumably got badges from the encounter. You also probably got some small amount of resources from the hack/raid. But your ego is so fragile you get miffed by a single artifact thrown back?

There are at least 3 things that could be happening.

1. It could be test fire; as in nothing more than a simple probe to see if you are online. If you respond by rebuffing quickly or some fast comm message, then they know there is no reason to attack your planet just yet.

2. It could be real fire; as in a real attack, but ultimately a failure to disable (in which case you should see the attack as a compliment to the strength of your ship).

3. It could be surrender fire; as they already know that they can't do anything to you but at least they showed a little backbone and didn't just play dead.

Precisely, I mean I like when people CM me after I've disabled them, they get zeroed, I get more resources/stats.

Eh. I see no point in zeroing someone unless they particular peeve me off.

Perhaps I should just wait until my 12 hour timer is up next time and blow them up and badge them again then eh? Since most likely, they'll still be in my messages from my news tab.

In my opinion, if someone has to use a bunch of artifacts to disable you, take it as a compliment. It means they know your ship is much stronger than theirs. Just gloat and disable 'em back without arti's (or with if you feel like being mean).

I take the cm thing 2 ways,
1. if its mid run and im still using those buffs I take it as another opportunity to disable and raid them as they are obviously doing it to be annoying and cant take being badged.

2. If im offline and they are a lower rank I'll accept a cm if they have a go at disabling me

I hear where you are coming from, but the logic of it still fascinates me.

You are saying they are deserving of another disable because they quote, "can't take a badge," but I am saying it seems the more fragile ego is the one who can't take a missile. I guess I keep coming back to which one is worth more or which one does the most "damage" worthy of a reprisal.

With the ship attack, you disabled them (meaning some kind of repair "cost;" either credits or artifacts; unless they use the base). You hack/ raid, blah, blah, all that has been mentioned before.

With the missile, all they did was take out buffs that chances are you could put right back on. The "cost" of the missile then is in terms of energy spent to replace the grid console, blah, blah, etc. Now granted, someone wasting your energy might be worth smacking them back; especially if they missile repeatedly. But one time?

I guess the other reason it fascinates me is because I haven't been a big npc player. I tend to see the game through the lens of pvp. So someone hitting me with a missile quote, "mid run," wouldn't make that much difference to me.

To each his own I suppose. Hit them for whatever reason suits you I say.
You can hit them just because it is the first Tuesday of the month and that is when you go on your killing spree!
Have fun!

Personally, i don't mind people using def debuffs on my ship because I interpret it as them knowing i am strronger than them. Attack debuffs however I will try to zero them for as all it is is a way to stop them taking as much damage which is a bit whimpy and the reason there are things as nanites, rep nano's, shield amps and restorers is so that you can take more damage whether you are attacking another ship or defending your ship. if anyone uses scan/ cloak debuffs i just hit them all the time, the amount of scan and cloak on my ship means that you have to have a pretty poor scan and cloak not to be able to hack me...
Overall the message is play the game how you choose and if you don't like it there are plenty of other games on Fb to play!!

A1th0m1s out...

By saying I zero people for CMing me what I meant was I use the CM as an excuse rather than get all pissy over it. It gets even more fun when they alert you to their legion.

^ Ah now THAT I can understand. Thanks for putting it in a clearer light for me.