Item Trading

[Redkeekee]

You don't know what my counter-attack is though, so you'll have to devise one on the spot!  Hehe.

Actually it doesn't matter because Dase style = no manip at all. Owned!

Unless of course... Dase style of no manip = actually a different kind of manip... and you already have a counterattack for it...

OK, I'm scared now... Can't you stop watching me?

I'm outside your bedroom window.

[rygorych]

You don't know what my counter-attack is though, so you'll have to devise one on the spot!  Hehe.

Actually it doesn't matter because Dase style = no manip at all. Owned!

Unless of course... Dase style of no manip = actually a different kind of manip... and you already have a counterattack for it...

OK, I'm scared now... Can't you stop watching me?

I'm outside your bedroom window.

This reminds me of Twilight. In a good way.

[Ugri2]

From what I see, most people are against the idea because they wouldn't ever do, not because its necessarily detrimental to the game. I don't know if we should make a rule to prohibit doing it or not, as it seems no one would do it anyway.

Then read my post again.

It is VERY unlikely that two people reaching tier 3  and trading a staff for an orb will use it to fight each other. It creates a silent alliance. It creates preteaming suspicions and drama.

Dont do it.

[rygorych]

From what I see, most people are against the idea because they wouldn't ever do, not because its necessarily detrimental to the game. I don't know if we should make a rule to prohibit doing it or not, as it seems no one would do it anyway.

Then read my post again.

It is VERY unlikely that two people reaching tier 3  and trading a staff for an orb will use it to fight each other. It creates a silent alliance. It creates preteaming suspicions and drama.

Dont do it.

And 2 people sharing mine spots don't create preteaming suspicions and drama? And Kruppe passing near Slythe's expo when Slythe hoarded 30k and going to hit weakest player (Darker) instead, isn't creating preteaming suspicious and drama?

Ugri, I understand your concerns, but they are real problems FML faces regardless of whether item trading is there or not.

In your example, 2 people traded items. Did they do so silently? Nope, because this would indicate that they are PMing = ban, bye bye. So they talked in chat.  So other players know what's happening.
A: "I'll give you orb for staff, B, how about it?"
B: " Ok cool come here"
C: "Yo that's not cool, hey D, we have to stop fighting cause A and B are not fighting, they're trading items"
D: "Yeah let's team these nerds!"

How is this any different from:
A: "Hey B, let me have last 10k in that mine between us"
B: "Ok, ok fine."
C: "Yo that's not cool, hey D, we have to stop fighting cause A and B are not fighting, they are hoarding gold"
D: "Yeah let's team these nerds!"

The second scenario is commonplace and is accepted as part of FFA. It's not any different than the first, actually even more dangerous. 10k can buy about 200 food of army. A traded item is a small advantage.

[Ugri2]

I dont think the topic is about sharing mines so stop digressing.

And as for your example, if they decided to trade pre game, there isnt anything in the chat. And even if there is, it creates dumb games with people thanking the other for the nice item he gave, and uses it to kill player 3 and 4.

Dont do it

[rygorych]

Ugri, I'm giving an example of mines as being a legit tactic and not any different than items.

If 2 players drop items without chat, it's obvious that they either PM or agreed befor game (aka preteam). Aka ban.

Your last point about using items to kill other players... OK, and this is not normal how? If I play HU or Orc I can easily own UD, without any bonus items. Problem?
If I'm lucky positioned and have 4 mines while you have 2, I can kill you. Problem?

FFA isn't fair. If you have to fight a stronger player, you will lose. So ask for help. He got an extra mine from his peace-friend, you get one too. He traded items, you trade too.

[Ugri2]

I have a relative doing like you, talking a lot and making stupid digression and metaphors to compare stuff which cannot be compared.

Mines : you can like on silverpine, share the two mines (one each) in time of peace. BUT YOU COULD AS WELL TRY TO FIGHT TO GET THE TWO

Items : you can give an items. BUT YOU CANNOT CERTAINLY FIGHT FOR IT BECAUSE YOU CANNOT GET IT UNLESS IT IS GIVEN

caps to enlight the important parts. Not the same. Dont do it.

[rygorych]

Mines = gold. Gold mined out = gold you can't return.

2 people teaming = chippo from one side, mass tanks griffs blizzard from the other side. You lose 75% of your base, they back off. You can't return your base, either.

Sharing mines, attacking together, trading items comes down to one thing only, Ugri:

TEAMING.

And teaming is essential in FFA.

There are 2 types of bad teaming:
1. Preteaming = banned
2. Feeding = banned

Item trading is neither.

Do it.

[rygorych]

And btw, I'm really curious who voted "no". Ati, Ugri and Lw did and they at least said something. Guys, if you voted "no", tell me why, so I can maybe persuade you.

[ATiBright]

Here I will go more in depth and give you the exact reason why I don't want it allowed.  The funnest and most important part of FFA is being able to think, reason, and react on the fly.  Meaning every single FFA is different from any other ffa, your tactics, who you team, who gets fed, who has the most gold, who tomes a player and has the best hero levels.  Deciding the share a goldmine is going to be an on-the-fly decision.  You never go into the game thinking man I hope DasE wants to share that goldmine with me at 38 minutes... you never go into a  game thinking man Ebo is going to have 10/10/10 heroes I hope player C agrees to team him with me, even if you are the strongest player you don't go in thinking, man I need to manip this idiot into not teaming me even though I'm the strongest.  All these scenarios come as it happens, decisions to be made, sometimes idiotic that results in bad teaming scenarios of course but it makes people think and play the game as it happens.

Now if you think hrmm item trading, I'm an orc player.  All of a sudden you go into the game thinking I need to put myself in a scenario where I can give this human player a lightning orb in exchange for a staff.  You will enter games with a mindset of who to be friendly with, and who to be aggressive with strictly for an item strategic advantage. It should not happen that way.  Elf players first of all have the shittiest staff and no reason for other races to want their items, Orc Orb, Hu Staff, UD Orb.  Look at how strong orc and hu heroes are now.  Now imagine a BM TC SH with Hu Staff and a blademaster with +46 and an Undead orb (you hate human and orc cheese ebo and your idea is just going to make it more retarded)  Aside from the imbalanced factor though I think it involves planning to make alliances and enemies before the game even starts which shouldn't happen.

The only things in FFA you should truly be able to do before the game even starts is have scenarios in mind for what to do in certain positions, on certain maps, and with certain races.  Predetermining who you ally with and make enemies with based on what item you can get is bad for the game-type.

[rygorych]

Louis, good post and good arguments but pre-game strategy is already race-based.
If I ever face Maga, I know he's going to play UD, I know what I will do if spawn near him. I know what I will do if I spawn near a NE player who loves to straight tech to chims and take someone out fast. I know what I will do if I spawn near a player who hates orcs.

I already plan a head on races and personalities. I know certain players hate each other and I plan to use this. I know certain players like to rush and some like to hoard.

And I'm not the only one.  I'm confident that any top FML player already knows enough to plan ahead. Making decisions on the fly is for ladder. Doesnt work in pro games like FML.

P.S.
If Orc gets BM with corruption + claws + hu staffs, they'll probably get teamed off the map. It's not retarded. Nothing is retarded, except people who don't team vs strongest. Because those people lose.

[ATiBright]

I agree we have plans vs certain players for maps and games against them.  See season 8 where I played undead 1 time the entire season and it was simply to Tier 2 tower rush DasEland or Nline on wetlands because I knew I wouldn't stand a chance against arguably 2 of the best 3 FFA orc's of all time in the late game on a map where I couldn't possibly outgold them.  But that's preparing for a scenerio based on the map and my opponents.  Not preparing for a scenerio based on what items I can get from a player.  Let's imagine mooshupork is playing in FML we all know who he is, we have all owned him on the ladder multiple times.  Suddenly if item trading is allowed I might even decide to crossmap tome mooshu into submission just for a lightning orb.  I know for a fact we would all be thinking the same thing going into our games.  Instead of preparing for strong players and positions we would be preparing to dominate weaker players into forfeiting items to us.

Do you think Unholydreadlord wants to be smacked around every single game and be forced to give out 3 or more orb of corruptions?  Of course not.

[rygorych]

I agree we have plans vs certain players for maps and games against them.  See season 8 where I played undead 1 time the entire season and it was simply to Tier 2 tower rush DasEland or Nline on wetlands because I knew I wouldn't stand a chance against arguably 2 of the best 3 FFA orc's of all time in the late game on a map where I couldn't possibly outgold them.  But that's preparing for a scenerio based on the map and my opponents.  Not preparing for a scenerio based on what items I can get from a player.  Let's imagine mooshupork is playing in FML we all know who he is, we have all owned him on the ladder multiple times.  Suddenly if item trading is allowed I might even decide to crossmap tome mooshu into submission just for a lightning orb.  I know for a fact we would all be thinking the same thing going into our games.  Instead of preparing for strong players and positions we would be preparing to dominate weaker players into forfeiting items to us.

Do you think Unholydreadlord wants to be smacked around every single game and be forced to give out 3 or more orb of corruptions?  Of course not.

Ehh, I think you're exaggerating a little bit. If item trading was openly and clearly permitted, we wouldn't see these kinda of scenarios popping up all that much. And what's so bad about them anyways?

Let's say I pop near Moosho and dominate him into letting me use his natural expo (this happens very often in many games). Is it any different? Is it any different from Maga going to tome weakest player so he can get triple 6 quickly?

And if someone did "use" the weakest player, whether for exp, gold or items.. so what do the other players do? Yep, team the tomer.

Any strat which logically makes sense can backfire. This isn't solo, this is FFA. Everything you do that you think helps you win (get items, gold, high lvl heroes) can backfire any moment.

One moment you're the king of the world, pro-toming that 60 apm noob near you
The next moment you're down a base because you got attacked by chippo from top, tanks griffs from bottom. While the 60 APM noob you tomed is non-stop harassing your expos with fs wolves/EQ/invis blademaster/3 bats (at least I think that's what Moosho goes for these days, I might be wrong)

This is madness FFA.

[ins]

For those who remember, I personally split off of Clan Lone and (re-)formed Fury because I thought strongly that Private Chat was a legitimate tool to use in games.  I still feel that way, a few years later after becoming much more of a solo player.  Clearly, I believe that manipulation and teaming are parts of the game; my actions have proven that.

I think that you can donate someone an item to have another capable player in the game, which can help bring down a giant.  I think that it's possible to do it in a very reasonable manner where you're clearly trying to win by creating an alliance based upon incentives.

I voted No on this, and not exactly because of ethical reasons.  The problem lies in practical applications of this technique.  How do we set limits on item donating?  Trading?  Buying and selling?  Where is the line?  Because trading orbs and staffs and claws and auras...this makes the game a lot more about being a merchant than anything else.  And when that happens, the game grinds to a halt and the action melts away.  It's fine to have long games with some lulls in the action, but we're talking about demoting fighting and placing more incentive on treaties.  At some point, someone has to go and fight someone else.  Someone has to be knocked out of the game.  Someone has to be the last man standing, and the only way for that to happen is by the other players losing the war.

I think Ebo was right to bring up the idea of item trading in the forum, because it was never really discussed much in the past (from my memory) and it's certainly an interesting tactic.  But the biggest problem that I see with this is that the game becomes prolonged as players are more focused on negotiating than they are on backstabbing and demolishing.  FFA is a balance between economics and hero levels, in many respects.  If it wasn't for hero levels, people would only ever fight over territory (aka gold mines) at this higher level.  Item trading is a giant incentive for players to fight less and for less action to be present in games.

[rygorych]

That's a good comment INS, but I think you're kinda making an issue where there isn't one.

I'm willing to bet that if item trading was explicitly allowed, games wouldn't change much at all. There would be a few where item trades happened and those games would have as much action as in the others, just more spicy.


Item trading doesn't cause boring/passive games. Players do. Some players are aggressive, others passive. This isn't going to change.