"Loafing" in Minigames

[Pinata]

It's like joining a varsity sport just to say you were on the team, and not actually train with meaning or participate in competitions with much spirit.

 

 

This, I feel like if they do trim their completionist cape, they didn't deserve it, because they leeched the hardest part about it. None of the players are "required" to get it, they just have a lust for e-status.

[SirIzenhime]

minigames are meant to be played. If you're not actually playing them, I think you should GTFO off of them.

 

Just the way I feel.

You being on a CW team and doing nothing is basically preventing one extra person who could have potentially helped the team I'm on win. What if you were the reason that one ancient mage playing tonight got on the other team?

 

Either play the game, or log out.

[Dietrich]

@Zaaps1

 

I do not believe that I have to justify my loafing. However, since I opened this topic for discussion, I feel inclined to respond to the users posting here in opposition to loafing, and to do that, I have to provide some logical reasoning. This isn't a case of my doing something immoral and having to try to justify/rationalise it to myself. Frankly, I don't consider it to be a question of morality, but I see that there are others (such as yourself) who disagree with me on this point.

 

No, I do not think freeloading is "right", but I don't consider it to be "wrong", either. If anything, I don't believe it is "right" for Jagex to require players to play a single minigame for months and months as a requirement for the trimmed Completionist cape, but there is nothing I can do about that. I can choose to either go along with it or give up on the cape altogether (since there's no chance that I'll be able to naturally accumulate 5k games), and I've made my choice. I realise that some players may be slightly inconvenienced by my loafing in some situations (such as in close games where the presence of one more active player could tip the scales), but I simply do not have the energy and focus to dedicate myself wholly to each of the 5k Castle Wars games. I am a fairly charitable person, but there is a limit to my generosity, just as there is for everyone. For example, I would gladly accept in most cases if a new player asks me to escort them to a particular city in RS, however, I would not be willing to accommodate them (with all due respect) if someone asks me to take them on a tour of every major city in the game. In the same way, if the Comp (t) requirement was only 1k games, I would most likely oblige my CW teammates' wishes and try to win the games for them, even though I do not personally care whether I win or lose.

 

I am not so easily offended, by the way, but thank you.

 

 

Loafing in a multi-player mini-game is definitely not cool. By doing so you're taking up space on the team which could be used by someone who would actually benefit it thus dragging your whole team down. Basically you're making yourself useless baggage that all your team mates have to cover for for the length of the game.

 

Now, you say you're only playing the games to get the Completetionist cape and that you're forced to loaf because of Jagex's unreasonable requirement of 5000 castlewars games to obtain it. Oh really? That's not how it works. You seem to have gotten it the wrong way around. It's unreasonable of you to expect to receive the cape without playing 5000 castlewars games. The requirements are what they are. If you feel they are unreasonable you don't have to get the cape. You don't need the cape; you want the cape. It's unreasonable of you to expect the other people playing the mini-game to put up with your loafing because you feel you are being "Forced" to play games to get the requirement for a cape that is entirely optional.

I completely agree; the requirements are what they are. What is the requirement exactly? It is to complete 5k CW games, nothing more, nothing less. Winning or losing is irrelevant, and there is no implication that you must be actively striving for victory during each and every one of those 5k games. I understand that our opinions on the matter differ, but that's life. To let you know, it is extraordinarily unlikely that anyone who manages to earn the Comp (t) will have played all 5k games without afking some or even most of them. I'm curious - how many CW games have you played? It's difficult to comprehend just how many 5k games truly is until you've done a lot of Castle Wars and find that you've only managed to complete a few hundred.

 

Essentially, I fully recognise and accept that I will have to dedicate the time to complete the 5k games required. Whether or not I should be expected to try my very best to win those games is another matter entirely.

 

 

It's like joining a varsity sport just to say you were on the team, and not actually train with meaning or participate in competitions with much spirit.

 

 

This, I feel like if they do trim their completionist cape, they didn't deserve it, because they leeched the hardest part about it. None of the players are "required" to get it, they just have a lust for e-status.

If you truly believe that, then you should not respect Castle Wars (the player) and anyone else who manages to obtain the trimmed cape in the future. At the risk of sounding like a broken record, it is extremely unlikely that anyone who attains it will have actively played all 5k games. And it is not "leeching", by the way, since Comp (t) loafers in CW do not rely on their teammates; winning or losing is irrelevant to them, since they are only there to watch as the time-limit expires 5k times. Also, while some players undoubtedly want the cape for the prestige, many others aspire to owning it for the accomplishment (think: mountaineers climbing mountains simply because they are "there").

[Kimberly]

If I am working hard to achieve something in a group setting, I will be upset if others are not pulling their weight and I will be twice as upset if it costs us the goal (winning, collecting clay, keeping the boat afloat, whatever.)

 

Your post might help me better contain myself in the future; it's not right for me to lash out at people under any circumstances, especially in minigames where Jagex has made it so simple to not help. Not being frustrated with the situation it puts me in, though? I just don't see it happening any time soon. Maybe one day I'll find that minigame for me that is so awful that I must play to enhance my gaming that I'll 'leech'/'loaf' as you've described. So far I haven't yet.

 

But then again I haven't played Mobilizing Armies yet...meh.

[Neltak]

I don't agree with loafing in team-based minigames where the result of active players is effected by loafers. But loafers will be loafers. There is nothing we can do about it in some minigames besides hope for an activity bar which would be flawed as mentioned earlier.

 

If you truly believe that, then you should not respect Castle Wars (the player) and anyone else who manages to obtain the trimmed cape in the future. At the risk of sounding like a broken record, it is extremely unlikely that anyone who attains it will have actively played all 5k games. And it is not "leeching", by the way, since Comp (t) loafers in CW do not rely on their teammates; winning or losing is irrelevant to them, since they are only there to watch as the time-limit expires 5k times. Also, while some players undoubtedly want the cape for the prestige, many others aspire to owning it for the accomplishment (think: mountaineers climbing mountains simply because they are "there").

I'm not sure where you think the sense of accomplishment comes from if you loaf 90% of the trimmed requirements (think: climbing the first 900 meters of Mt. Everest, then taking a helicopter to the top).

[Dietrich]

I don't agree with loafing in team-based minigames where the result of active players is effected by loafers. But loafers will be loafers. There is nothing we can do about it in some minigames besides hope for an activity bar which would be flawed as mentioned earlier.

Fair enough.

 

I'm not sure where you think the sense of accomplishment comes from if you loaf 90% of the trimmed requirements (think: climbing the first 900 meters of Mt. Everest, then taking a helicopter to the top).

90%? The 5k Castle Wars games is only one of many requirements for the Completionist (t), and I don't have a problem with the others.

[Robert_R]

I'm not sure where you think the sense of accomplishment comes from if you loaf 90% of the trimmed requirements (think: climbing the first 900 meters of Mt. Everest, then taking a helicopter to the top).

90%? The 5k Castle Wars games is only one of many requirements for the Completionist (t), and I don't have a problem with the others.

He meant time spent doing the requirements. I think it was 84 (could be off by a few) days of game time to play 5000 castlewars games. I wouldn't say 90% but it's definitely the majority of the time you'll spend to get the requirements finished.

[Youmu]

Instead of wasting 25 minutes sitting through a Castle Wars game why not actually do something during that time? I mean it's not like you get combat xp for attacking other players, you know.

 

Like you guys said, the outcome is the same no matter what you do. Therefore, do something that would help you in the long run (Castle Wars tickets, melee/range/magic training). I see absolutely no reason not to.

 

The same applies to other minigames. Great Orb Project is a very good example of this as well (although it does have an activity bar now). Want good tokens and as high rc xp as possible? Contribute to the game by dragging orbs into the altar and/or repelling the opposition team's orbs.

[Makoto_the_Phoenix]

There's been loafers in CW since it came out in '04. They're nothing new, but they're pretty damn annoying.

 

My stance on it: If you're playing a team effort game, then help your team out by participating. If you don't want to participate, help your team out by leaving. Laziness is an attribute of players riding on others to gain their goals, and some minigames have had activity bars implemented to curb this behavior. Honestly though, if anyone thinks it's just alright to do that, then I and the team I'm on would be far better served without their presence.

 

Don't take what I say personally.

[Dietrich]

He meant time spent doing the requirements. I think it was 84 (could be off by a few) days of game time to play 5000 castlewars games. I wouldn't say 90% but it's definitely the majority of the time you'll spend to get the requirements finished.

Ahh, I see. That does make more sense, although there are plenty of other requirements which take quite awhile to meet as well (e.g. Champions' Challenge, Shattered Heart, etc...).

 

 

Instead of wasting 25 minutes sitting through a Castle Wars game why not actually do something during that time? I mean it's not like you get combat xp for attacking other players, you know.

 

Like you guys said, the outcome is the same no matter what you do. Therefore, do something that would help you in the long run (Castle Wars tickets, melee/range/magic training). I see absolutely no reason not to.

I can see what you're saying, but the fact remains that there simply isn't much to do while in Castle Wars. Most of the players loafing there for the Completionist (t) requirement are already maxed, so some paltry combat experience is no real incentive. As for the tickets, I imagine that most of us don't care about them; I certainly don't. The only CW reward I ever particularly wanted was a Guthix Halo, and I had enough tickets to purchase one on the day that Jagex released them into the game. Really, the only items left for me to spend tickets on are the armour sets, but considering how I don't especially like Castle Wars to begin with (hence the loafing), they're all but useless to me.

 

The same applies to other minigames. Great Orb Project is a very good example of this as well (although it does have an activity bar now). Want good tokens and as high rc xp as possible? Contribute to the game by dragging orbs into the altar and/or repelling the opposition team's orbs.

There is no GOP requirement for the Completionist Cape, thankfully. I quickly realised how terrible and glitchy the gameplay mechanics in that minigame were not long after its release. I haven't played GOP for a considerable amount of time, and I only go back on the rare occasion to earn more Lunar Tabs, as I'm primarily on the Lunar Spellbook. /off-topic

--------------------

 

 

Good night/morning, everyone. I'm off to bed. :)

[Blutters]

I thought the people going for Comp(T) were joining games with 5 min left...

Skipped over or ignored?

I believe someone said you could get 5+ games per hour towards the req just doing this.

And I think this is what those who are actually trying to get Comp(T) are doing.

[HexiledRazz]

Doing nothing and getting rewarded in return shouldn't happen. People wish to do nothing and get something in return. In this instance, you my friend, are one of those people. I remember when people played castlewars for enjoyment, and not for it's rewards. Why? Because the rewards sucked. But it was still a classic, and fun minigame. So it retained a good amount of players who actually enjoyed it.

 

But adding these new rewards have just encouraged people to be lazy in order to obtain them.

 

Jagex added an activity meter to Soul wars, and the damage requirement to Pest Control to combat this kind of behavior. But all they only seem to see it fit in minigames that have a noticeable impact on a player's levels(As both have EXP rewards) But tend to not give two [cabbage]s for the other players playing the minigame, and their immediate enjoyment(Because you know, who care's about a player's enjoyment? It's all about levels and goals in the end, right? It's why we have bots).

 

However, people who do it, are going to do it regardless of what other says. And it isn't against the rules, so reporting will do nothing(And may result in a ban for the person who reported due to abusing the system).

 

Realistically all minigames should have an activity meter. But as far as Jagex actually doing something like that, is unlikely.

 

You can flame people who stand around at minigames all you want, but it isn't going to do a damned thing. All we can do is write suggestions to Jagex for activity meters to be applied to these minigames as well.

[Platinum_Myr]

The OP's argument about consequences is dangerous. Ethics based on consequences is foolish, and is a very poor system of understanding morality. Ethics has nothing to do with what is, but rather, what actions we ought perform. A system of ethics based on the concept that something is ok, because no one has enforced the law is wrong. Many things are known to be ethically wrong, but are not enforced or are unenforceable. But that doesn't make them any less different. (We can debate the various good systems of ethics, but this assumes something that the general systems say is wrong). For example, lets say we lived in a society where the legal rule was to slaughter our firstborn to appease the "Gods". We know this is ethically wrong, and ought to be the case, regardless of the legal rules and punishments set up to make us to the other.

 

 

the "everyone will do it this way" is not a valid moral argument either, because morality and ethics are not about what is, but about what ought to be. Murder, theft, adultary, lying, and so forth happen despite the fact that we know they are not morally ok. But we don't decide to believe they are ok just because people do them. Neither are the "wrong" simply because people are punished for doing them.

 

Also, the OP argues based on his/her own goals being ruined, which leads to egocentric ethics ( a system of ethics I disagree with..)

 

However, just because the argument is flawed does not mean the OP's outcome is incorrect. In the case of CastleWars (some of this is my opinion and not based very strong in ethics): Loafing does not tend to ruin my experience of the game, because they a) don't get in the way of me having fun, b) don't tend to have a large impact on which team wins. (because even if they were "participating", they may not provide that much impact on who wins anyways). and c) their presence doesn't change the effort required by the other players. The only flaw is when far more people loaf on one team than the other. However, most loafers choose to go to random teams, and therefor get spread more evenly across the teams. This means that on average the impact is minimal.

 

For other minigames, loafing actively minimizes rewards for other teammembers, (DG, PC, SW etc), and therefore is completely wrong.

 

I don't like trying to apply a general "moral rule" because these rules cannot be made to apply in every situation. The big difference between the "work" and the "game" scenario, is this: 2 people working on a project, and one person does nothing, effectively the other person must double their efforts to get reward. In castlewars, this is no where near the case, so the situations are not at all the same.

[KingDodongo]

In retrospect, you raise many fair points, however I think both sides of the argument are flawed.

 

In terms of the arguments for loafing, there is nothing wrong with loafing if you are achieving what you want to achieve. I have no problem with the "selfish" aspect of it - you're playing for one express purposes, which you are achieving.

 

For the arguments against, yes you can say he is hindering you're achievement. But to ask him to play for you though there is no incentive (he already has the rewards he wants) is wrong. Altruism is especially pointless in Runescape. If he's loafing in the game, chances are he could be doing something in real life like studying, which ultimately is of much more benefit than tickets that he doesn't want to spend. Probably.

 

In conclusion, I don't think you can differentiate between those who have played 5000 games, and those who have simply been in 5000 games - the only way is by the number of tickets they have. And I would assume that if you had been loafing in 5000 games, you would have fewer, however I don't really know about that, you might get lucky. So maybe they could introduce some seriously expensive reawards? That is, rewards that might cost one or two thousand tickets? From the 50 or so CW games I played a while back, that sounds about the amount of tickets you would have at the end. (Yes, I had an awful W/L ratio.). In regards to my earlier post, I take it back - it's not semantics. You're doing what's asked. And there isn't really a foolproof way to implement an activity bar due to the way the game works. And that quote applies to both sides of the argument, though you could say it sounds more pious on the Against. But I wouldn't, because that doesn't mean anything.

[Kata_Phfract__the_slayer]

I hate it when people do that.

 

its not that I think its dis honourable, or that they don't deserve any of the rewards. I just don't think people should do it.

[Helm_Lardar]

Gee, I never thought of it like that before. I guess loafing in minigames is fair enough-after all, in something like CastleWars there is no limit on the amount of players so as long as you join the stronger team you're helping balance things out.

[strilmus]

As much as I understand that there are groups with separate goals in mind, it can't possibly be that hard to throw a post up on the RSOF that you're going to designate an unofficial "loafing" world for this kind of thing (hell, there might be one right now), go there, and not bother anybody at all. I mean, because it's not even like the GOP or SC groups, nobody can storm in and try to troll your activity because none of it actually matters either way. You wouldn't have to set up a clan chat or do any of those organizational types of things at all if you're planning to do ABSOLUTELY NOTHING anyway. No meticulous planning ever went into slacking off. Hell, if anything, since you guys aren't even actually trying to play, a second group could just come in and farm tickets off of your unmoving butts.

 

Overall it would be pretty easy to find people willing to not do anything, and people willing to farm tickets from people who don't do anything.

 

I'm just surprised that in all the time you spent doing nothing, you never thought about any kind of alternate solution that wouldn't annoy the hell out of your teammates, regardless of any kind of actual or imagined damage being done or how much you just didn't care about it, while being convenient for everybody.

 

Oh, and I think the numerous amounts of reports occurring from these incidents are probably annoying the hell out of the people who have to sort through them, so, hey, maybe there is something wrong happening here.

[Zaaps1]

@Zaaps1

 

I do not believe that I have to justify my loafing. However, since I opened this topic for discussion, I feel inclined to respond to the users posting here in opposition to loafing, and to do that, I have to provide some logical reasoning. This isn't a case of my doing something immoral and having to try to justify/rationalise it to myself. Frankly, I don't consider it to be a question of morality, but I see that there are others (such as yourself) who disagree with me on this point.

 

No, I do not think freeloading is "right", but I don't consider it to be "wrong", either. If anything, I don't believe it is "right" for Jagex to require players to play a single minigame for months and months as a requirement for the trimmed Completionist cape, but there is nothing I can do about that. I can choose to either go along with it or give up on the cape altogether (since there's no chance that I'll be able to naturally accumulate 5k games), and I've made my choice. I realise that some players may be slightly inconvenienced by my loafing in some situations (such as in close games where the presence of one more active player could tip the scales), but I simply do not have the energy and focus to dedicate myself wholly to each of the 5k Castle Wars games. I am a fairly charitable person, but there is a limit to my generosity, just as there is for everyone. For example, I would gladly accept in most cases if a new player asks me to escort them to a particular city in RS, however, I would not be willing to accommodate them (with all due respect) if someone asks me to take them on a tour of every major city in the game. In the same way, if the Comp (t) requirement was only 1k games, I would most likely oblige my CW teammates' wishes and try to win the games for them, even though I do not personally care whether I win or lose.

 

I am not so easily offended, by the way, but thank you.

 

I do agree that Jagex made a very crappy requirement (justifyible, but a bad one all the same), but that's beyond our control now.

 

There are two things I want to point out about what you've said.

 

First, it's like you're adopting an attitude that this high end reward should be obtainable to anyone, or that you deserve it by time commitment alone. While at first that seems possible, it really isn't. It really should be given to only those players who are truly dedicated, and taking the easy way out isn't dedication at all. To quote yourself, "I simply do not have the energy and focus to dedicate myself wholly to each of the 5k Castle Wars games", but I'm going to claim the rewards as if I did put all my effort into every game. Certainly, you can't be expected to put 100% effort into every game, but to put 0% effort into every game is, simply put, appalling in my eyes. You said that if the requirement were only 1k games, you WOULD put effort in. And furthermore you seem to emphasize that you're doing what you are doing to help yourself. I think this is the center of the disagreement. The logistics (# of CW games) and motives (you playing just for your Ccape) should have NOTHING to do with how you behave in the game. As it is a team game, if you are not part of the team and actively supporting it, you should not be playing. Am I wrong? This is why I drew the comparison to Dungeoneering. There are a million things wrong with loafing in DG, and you're right that it's not exactly the same as CW, but strip away all the exterior differences and you'll find both are exactly the same. You enter the game under full knowledge that you are supposed to support your team, and that your team is supposed to support you. And while you're in the game, you actively and consciously forsake that premise for your own personal gain.

 

Who cares if you're only going for 85 dungeoneering, but all your teammates are going for 120. Does that make them depend on you less?

Who cares if you only need 5 more dungeons for your goal, but all your teammates need hundreds. Does that make them depend on you less?

How about CW? Just because you need 5x more games, does that means that your team magically has a lesser dependence on you?

Or just because you are going for a C-cape instead of fun, you deserve special treatment?

 

Do it how it's supposed to be done, or don't do it at all. Of course, again, I can't say I, or anyone else, can expect you to do your best all the time. But to do it none of the time under these circumstances, well, let's say that if you don't seem a problem here, something is wrong.

 

Justify loafing? What's the point? If you are betraying your team in a team game, there's frankly nothing to justify.

 

Secondly, generosity and charity have nothing to do with this either. If you are on a sports team, and you decide to play a position in a game, is it a common practice for everyone on the team to get down on their knees and thank you? No, as a team sport, you are expected to help, not asked. In the same way, but consciously joining a team game, you are expected to be part of the team. I'd like to know what makes you think you can agree to such terms when you join, but then remove yourself later so you can be lazy.

 

You are expected to play with your team, not begged.

[xpx]

I think there is too much premise put on how much a loafer will hurt their team, particularly if you consider cw on themed worlds.

 

Firstly, loafers will ONLY hurt the teams if the numbers on each team are significantly unequal. If there is the same number on both teams, they would have absolutely no effect on the game at all.

 

Secondly, there are many low level players in the game that can't really make a difference in the game, so looking at the goal of the game, they might aswell be loafing.

 

Another problem is that there hardly is any teamwork, and a large part of the players don't actually do anything to help their team win(particularly if they only work on killing random people in neutral zones), thus they too can be considered loafers, too.

 

Overall, if you look at the game and its mechanics, it's quite easy to see why people would loaf the minigame and i don't think it significantly affects legit players. As said very early in the topic, everyone loafing and everyone legitimately playing the game produces exactly the same result, so why even bother?

[Tact]

I think there is too much premise put on how much a loafer will hurt their team, particularly if you consider cw on themed worlds.

 

Firstly, loafers will ONLY hurt the teams if the numbers on each team are significantly unequal. If there is the same number on both teams, they would have absolutely no effect on the game at all.

 

Secondly, there are many low level players in the game that can't really make a difference in the game, so looking at the goal of the game, they might aswell be loafing.

 

Another problem is that there hardly is any teamwork, and a large part of the players don't actually do anything to help their team win(particularly if they only work on killing random people in neutral zones), thus they too can be considered loafers, too.

 

Overall, if you look at the game and its mechanics, it's quite easy to see why people would loaf the minigame and i don't think it significantly affects legit players. As said very early in the topic, everyone loafing and everyone legitimately playing the game produces exactly the same result, so why even bother?

I'm not impressed by how some posters always rush to the extreme in their arguments (quoting xpx since he's the last poster to do so). In this particular case, you're making the case that there are only two types of players at Castle Wars worth considering: those who contribute and those that do not. Granted, there are players who influence the game's outcome a lot more than others, but lumping everyone who plays into one of these two categories discounts the complexity of the minigame. Everyone has a role they can play; for example smart players know that PKers and low levels tend to congregate at the center part of the map and walls, so they "use" them for area control and find alternative routes when capturing and defending. You can't fit loafers in ANY sort of strategy though, since their name implies that they're doing nothing.

[SirIzenhime]

There IS strategy to castle wars btw, don't try to dismiss that....at all.

The main Castle Wars world is NOT the place to look for people actually playing the game smart btw, so don't base it off of that.

[xpx]

There IS strategy to castle wars btw, don't try to dismiss that....at all.

The main Castle Wars world is NOT the place to look for people actually playing the game smart btw, so don't base it off of that.

I didn't say there wasn't, i was just considering the effect of loafers on the theme worlds, where it really has a VERY limited effect on the overall game. Loafers aren't a problem on organized private games, so why consider them.

[The_Fray]

From my experience playing minigames, loafers were never really much of a problem. Most of these players were often inexperienced at these minigames and hence did not have much to contribute anyway. I remember playing a whole lot of games at the Great Orb Project and loafers were actually considered to be a blessing. This was because most inexperienced players often tended to hurt a team's score rather than actually contribute towards it. I think that even if these players were actively contributing, they would not make much of a difference. Besides I would rather have a loafer on my team than a level 60 in rune who grabs the flag and ends up dying outside the castle.

 

If you do have problems with loafers, then I suggest you get you skill up in the game because a single experienced player can sway the outcome of the minigame much more than if all these loafers attempted to contribute.

[GuidesForScapers]

Everyone has a problem with things they are to stupid to do.

[Kimberly]

Everyone has a problem with things they are to stupid to do.

 

Errm...not only is your post horribly ironic but I'm having a very difficult time understanding your point of view.

 

How exactly is this behavior 'stupid'?