View Full Version : Training camps: Cheating or Tactic?
All right,
many of you have heard about the infamous training-camps of game 1: The situation was desperate for MCA. They were trapped in their Homesystem surrounded by allied TTW and OMAN forces. As those two allied factions were unable to destroy the MCA-HQ they decided to give low-level ships a chance to level up quickly and safe:
The high-level ships from the other faction were chosen as targets for the low-levels. By that the repair-ships of the other faction were also able to level up quickly as they had to repair those damaged vessels and gained points for enemy presence.
But I do not want to judge that specific situation. Imagine a two on two scenario where no alliance has the strengh to bring down the other. Is it OK if two FC agree to a training?
Your choices are above.
Personally I don't see the difference between a training camp and a real-life military exersize. Most militaries do perform life-fire exersizes, although they don't actually try to hit each other. Since ships in EoCo are moderately difficult to kill (you have to try to kill them, it doesn't happen accidentally) and easy to repair, there isn't any particular danger in shooting live rounds at them.
Of course, unless the people you're 'training' with decide to take advantage of the situation. Training camps aren't as effective as actual combat, because you have to be careful how much damage you cause, and the normal combat/repair ship ratio can't be maintained. High level ships are tough to repair to 100% under a constant barrage of fire, requiring an otherwise abnormally high number of repairships. In real combat, there's no reason to limit your damage, heck you're trying to maximize it, so the combat ships can make points faster by never having to skip a shot, and the repairships have less damage to repair because most ships are either slightly damaged, or completely destroyed. They still have plenty of work to do, but fewer repairships are required to keep the force combat ready.
I don't think that training camps are especially unfair. It's an effective method to train younger pilots, and there is the counter-balance of the inevitable strain on the alliance between the two factions. There will always be ships that fail to follow orders, shooting at allies in the wrong sectors, doing too much damage, firing gats, etc. Also, much of the time there are pilots in the respective factions that are vehemently against the concept of training camps, and starting one could cause a mutiny. So there's advantages and disadvantages to them... I think it balances out nicely. I would never acuse enemy factions of cheating by using training camps. They aren't against the rules. If you don't use them that's your choice, but if you can't beat the enemy because they used a certain tactic, you have to ask yourself why you didn't use it.
the donz
07-02-2002, 20:40
I think they make bad pilots with big guns :dark: :tup:
I'm against them. I know I defended it in game 1 but not anymore. It's cheating, it's boring and it doesn't actually give the pilots combat experience. Like the donz said, dumb pilots with big guns that also make nice big targets.
I'm inclined to agree. I think they're technically a legitimate tactics, but they're a _boring_ tactic - I know I would never use one. They would tend to make for a dull game, and I agree they make for bad pilots.
(I mean, who would you have bet on in a fight... the Bloody Angels in lvl 5s, or a bunch of newbies training-camped up to lvl 9s?)
(Actually, I kind of wish I'd seen that now... would have been funny to watch.)
Here Here
More wise words from Cepheus.
At the start of this game I activley argued against the use of training camps within the Navy and its Allies. Whilst they are not technically cheating, the rules don't say you can't do it, I feel they are totally out of the spirit of the game and in fact a great way for spies, cheats and spoilers to ruin an alliance.
btw Cepheus if your setting up that fight can I come and watch .. pleeeeasee ... promise I won't shoot at you. (I fly repair ship so I can't shoot anyway)
can I place a bet on that fight, 50 says BA's win without losing a ship :-)
yup, I don't like 'em either.. at best they turn the game into sim-spaceduckshoot, boring is the right word, and against the spirit of the game etc....
but... if you really want to give the multies/traitors in your Faction a chance to give your loyal members a real headache and Justify them a little by proving that "everyone bends the rules" excuse, go right ahead..
sighs...
I'd rather see a fight between 10 BA's and 10 TSWNN members. (Game 1 in the Oman for the new people)
That would be interesting. Too bad we all split and many stopped playing.
Lightspeed
09-02-2002, 13:34
I am against training camps. As I have said before, they are as close you can come to cheating without actually doing it. :mad:
Originally posted by the donz
they make bad pilots with big guns :dark: :tup:
Hey! I said that first, plagarist! Been saying it since g1, consider it proven beyond question in the MCA break-out & am amazed anyone still suggests them, though some do.
I also think doing it deliberately is against the "Fair Play" rule - I don't want to vote in this poll unless it has a straightforward "It is cheating" option.
B.
Originally posted by Kristof
I'd rather see a fight between 10 BA's and 10 TSWNN
Doubt if you could get 10 Angels fit to share the same billing as the No-Names. Kinda also-rans vs all-time-greats, innit?
If you did, it would rather depend on the scenario. In a war of manoeuvre & initiative, TSWNN would win hands down. In a set-piece, the Angels would all jump together & follow orders, organised by Zarrock & seargented by WilBill they would no doubt perform creditably.
But for the No-Names soltys would be in there early trying to murder someone, Radiator would be jumping back with single-figure shields, Octo would've jumped ahead with a cunning plan in mind, AgentX20 would be at least 2 jumps behind & Kristof would be arguing with Boris about the whole idea of orders anyway.
So it'd be just as well Blondie'd be killing something while AlphaQ, Eagle117 & zaphod kept us all alive.
Happy days!
B.
Okay, maybe I don't get it, but what's the big deal with Training Camps if they make "bad pilots with big guns"?
So you end up with a bunch of high-level ships that can't fight their way out of a paper bag. That sounds to me like a pretty strong argument for not having training camps.
Sort of like sending only your repairships on the first wave of attack is a bad idea. The second one is obviously not cheating, it's just stupid. So if training camps aren't specifically against the rules, but in general make more trouble than they're worth, why worry about calling it cheating?
It's a royal pain in the butt to run a training camp. You always have moron pilots hammering people too hard, retards that are shooting allies in the wrong sectors, etc, etc. Plus given the fact that a huge percentage of the EOC population is against it, even if you did have a training camp, you'd have to figure out some way to run it covertly without the rest of your faction finding out and throwing a fit.
So why even worry about calling it cheating or not? Quite frankly it's hard enough to make one work well (where the results aren't worse than not having it in the first place) that IMHO if you can run an effective training camp, you've got my respect. I mean the guys that can put together a training camp that doesn't tick off every pilot in their factions, doesn't produce morons with big guns, and doesn't have people shooting at each other too much or in the wrong places... hell, more power to ya.
Then again, if they can run their two factions that smoothly, chances are they'd win without the use of a training camp anyway.
Mr.Smith
11-02-2002, 00:48
another problem is that it ties down aloot of ships.
The only time training camps are effective is when there are only 3 factions left.
2 in alliance and one close up in HQ
Bump.
I want Kristof & maybe some deluded* ex-BAs to respond to this.
B.
* eg. thinking they were competent
Originally posted by Boris
Doubt if you could get 10 Angels fit to share the same billing as the No-Names. Kinda also-rans vs all-time-greats, innit?
If you did, it would rather depend on the scenario. In a war of manoeuvre & initiative, TSWNN would win hands down. In a set-piece, the Angels would all jump together & follow orders, organised by Zarrock & seargented by WilBill they would no doubt perform creditably.
But for the No-Names soltys would be in there early trying to murder someone, Radiator would be jumping back with single-figure shields, Octo would've jumped ahead with a cunning plan in mind, AgentX20 would be at least 2 jumps behind & Kristof would be arguing with Boris about the whole idea of orders anyway.
So it'd be just as well Blondie'd be killing something while AlphaQ, Eagle117 & zaphod kept us all alive.
Happy days!
B.
Those were the days. :devil:
Their was always some strong rivalry between us and the BA. I would like to see a fight between us to see who is best. I already kicked their asses in game 2 with my Maas comrades but that's not the same.
If game 2's mutually-assured-obliteration-of-all-sides is your idea of a _victory_, I'm kinda glad I was with the opposition :)
I'd love to say I'm up for a rematch any time, but since I started my new job I'm afraid it's more like anytime-that-happens-to-be-between-9am-and-10pm-GMT-on-a-Saturday.
(Cue image of a sullen angel, chained to a desk by one arm. The other arm holds a golden sword upraised, but someone appears to have fitted a pen nib on the tip. Blood drips from its wings, but appears to be diluted by ink.)
Sigh. You're right; those were the days.
Say, you know those old-boys-vs-new school reunion football matches that way too many schools do every year? ;)
(Start practising for the Navy v Maas reunion rematch in 2011.)
Hmm, Maas vs Navy in 2011... I'd bet we could play this game using mobile phones (well atleast the "professionals" are predicting that everyone are mobile in the near future). Wouldn't it be cool to make your moves everywhere everytime you need using mobile phone.
Oops. That was way out of topic. Now what comes to training camps, well you can train your fleet using them, but there is always the risk of people getting mad *when* their shields get below the allowed limit and then all the hell breaks loose and the whole alliance is in jeopardy. Happened in game1 and I don' t see any reason why it wouldn't happen in the future. People are pretty much the same nevertheless.
The_Hawk
16-02-2002, 10:59
Cheating usually means breaking the rules or bending them to suit your situation. But what rule is being addressed here?
What guide line says you should or shouldn't shoot the enemy?
How about this .....did you know that alliances are cheating ?
by not shooting some enemy ship you are streaching the same rule as you are with the training camps. And to make it even worse than training camps you guys start rogue lists ! So it appears that since you've already accepted that alliances and rogue lists are not cheating then by the same token training camps shouldn't be either.
My problem is finding the rule itself that even mentions any of these subjects. :coolred:
What would be the point of FC's being able to communicate with each other if not to co-ordinate between different factions? Saucy taunts?
-- inVurt
The_Hawk
17-02-2002, 03:22
When I approached the Wingee with this(btw he is opposed to alliances) I asked the same exact question.
What is the feature that allows us to talk to other FC's for ? why not just put and different taunt menu for the FC's ?
I finally figured out something about this game. It is NOT a war game. and no where does it say it is. It states clearly that it is a
"turned based strategy and points game" We are fighting for the most points NOT galactic domination.
Why do you think the Navy is still in first place when they have been gone for almost 40 turns. Because we were fighting for points. Call it passive call it selfish non aggresive strategy but we are still beating the pants of you guys without even being there. :grngrin:
Originally posted by The_Hawk
Call it passive call it selfish non aggresive strategy but we are still beating the pants of you guys without even being there. :grngrin:
You are REALLY groping with this one! :lolblue:
Oh, and even if Wingee opposes alliances, that doesn't mean the game isn't better with them than without them (personal preference, of course), immaterial of what was originally envisioned.
-- inVurt
The_Hawk
18-02-2002, 01:31
Bad Barbie was the last Navy ship to die in turn 244 and the above number was calculated as the Alliance Navy's lead as of turn 268. That's 24 Turns and counting. And if it hadn't been for the idiot that tried to get people to denounce their new factions and follow me. A tactic I find as appalling as the FC's did , you guys would still be chasing me around fruitlessly attempting to "take me out" but the dishonor of been used to by some other player as a rogue leader of some sort was reason enough for me to throw in the towel and take my loyal pilots with me into the TTW HQ :cry:
I didn't need to recruit anyone all the pilots I needed were all next to me when my hand was forced by my own principles to not allow anyone the oppertunity to follow me as a rogue. You can thank (names omitted) for my untimely demise. :(
I think Hawk makes the point really well.
Find the rule that even remotely mentions what training camps do before we start debating whether or not they're cheating.
Now a better discussion would be whether or not they're useful. If a 'dumb pilot with big guns' is really such a bad thing, and training camps are the moste effective way to make them, wouldn't training camps normally be a bad thing?
IMHO there's plenty of pro's and con's to training camps and they serve to balance the issue appropriately.
The_Hawk
18-02-2002, 06:07
I think the term "Training Camp" is misleading because your not training any pilots to fight as Spektyr said "Dumb Guns" is what you are pumping out. I think Leveling Camp would better describe the sit.
And what is so different between 2 allies shooting at each other than two enemies shooting at each other ? They both want to level up and the only difference is that the camp watches shield levels of the opponet actually a rather honorable gesture if you ask me. :cool:
"It really depends on the situation" is my answer.
Becouse I kind of do it my self.
a) if I can find a group of sleeping enemies I´m more then happy to practice at them [ok, they may die for it but who cares, they are enemies after all]. I call it practice becouse they are not shooting back or do nothing.. ..like shooting dummies :D
b) at low levels I just jump at the battle and try to level up if someone gets killed thats good.. ..but usually they or us jump out. If situation is like 5 level 1 vs 5 level 1 ships it is like practice camp or so I see it.
I do not like "special arrangements" where 2 FC:s make a deal and agreed one planet where low level ships can shoot each others. And give direct orders to stop shooting if shields go below 50% or so.. ..idea like that sounds just silly to me.
But it might be intresting if 2 enemy FC make a deal, jump at FF for 20 ships each and fight for last ship.. who win can take control of remains for.. ..let say, one allready dead faction. That might be intresting.. ..no retreat, no mercy, fight for the bitter end.
Cccellccpro
11-03-2002, 05:13
i used to be with em..heck i was in that training camp ..but then i saw how unfair it was to the mca...it also i think was the thing that hurt our relationship with the thirds..remember that night i cant remember the exact night..i was like the cold war all over again..we had third way jumps all over our controlled system some people panicked and fired..they fired back..everyone was freaking out...man that was fun! that was easily the best moment in eoc ever...opps im off the topic now arent i...sry
The_Hawk
12-03-2002, 00:50
I think it works best for the FC's to agree on Firefrost to be a leveling arena where you enter at your own risk check your treaty at the door and duke it out with whomever is there. if you are allied with a certain faction and get killed in the Frost by that ally then it is your own fault not the allies because all bets are off in the Frost. I think the name says it all.
You go there to Fire at enemies but if you stay the enemies will Frost you. :dark:
Okay, The_Hawk, I'm not quite understanding you. You seem to be full of this ideal that the Navy is in some way winning.
The points listed on the main page do not mean a thing. It is a lot easier for a level 1 to get points then for a level 10.
The point you're trying to make is this: The point of this game is to get up to level 5 or so, and then die. Then you do it all over again. And again. And again...
That seems fairly monotonous and boring.
The points on the main page should reflect the points that a faction has at that moment. Not all the pilots total score, but the score they have accumulated after they died the last time. Now that would mean something.
Oh, and...
"Finally, I would like to add that other ways of abusing the game or site not directly covered by the rules, may also be reason enough for deleting of accounts."
The second paragraph from the bottom.
And then for alliances...
"FCs can also message each other (without knowing who the opposing sides FC is) so they can arrange traitorous acts and the general breaking of treaties."
Straight from Clay's mouth.
Have fun mulling over my post and then attempting to belittle my post and me. :)
The_Hawk
13-03-2002, 18:50
Originally posted by Tagert
Okay, The_Hawk, I'm not quite understanding you.
Not many people do
Originally posted by Tagert
The point you're trying to make is this:
putting words in my mouth ?
Originally posted by Tagert
Have fun mulling over my post and then attempting to belittle my post and me. :)
This is what some people do all the time with anything I post.
I don't see the reason to belittle anyone . I have had very expressive people argue points and impart wisdom in forums without any need for trying to make the person posting look stupid or made fun of.
I will mull over what you have said but I will not attempt to berate you. I find that very disrespectful .
vBulletin® v3.6.9, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.