New Day New Way to Play: "Buyers", "Druggers" & "Griefers"

[LittleWillie 3,199]

I joined TO two years ago right after the Paint / Protection split. Back then there was much more anger towards so-called Druggers and Buyers. And there was reason for this. Then Buyers really could afford to buy a substantial advantage in Supplies over free players. This was especially true in terms of RKs. Buyers could use them all the time - and - back then they were 2 seconds of invulnerability too.

 

In two years TO has changed a lot. Daily mission player now can earn enough Supplies that the term "Drugger" just seem comical.  Supplies are a core aspect of game play. Supplies exist to be used. Everyone has access to an adequate source of Supplies. If you are not a "Drugger" today you are just hamstringing yourself. Do not blame other players for playing the actual game.

 

So let's just flat-out retire "Drugger" shall we? OK, that was the easy one.

 

The use of "Buyer" as a slur should also end. TO has many design shortcomings but in one area it deserves praise. TO allows free players to compete on a virtually even playing field with the dreaded Buyers. Yes, buyers can have a more varied garage, or a few more MU steps sooner, or buy a Kit a little before you.  But these all add up to relatively small advantage over the free player. If the free player masters the primary hull and turret it can afford to own gear as good or just slightly inferior to the "Buyer".

 

This is true at higher levels when all accounts have built up over time. However the Buyer can still obtain a massive advantage at the low ranks.  Buyers can run rampant t over free players at low levels.  These players will never, ever, ever earn enough from the Battle Fund to re-pay the cash spent.

 

So the purpose here is not strategy.  The purpose here is to make other players miserable. There is a term in online gaming for that. Tis sort of player is called a "Griefer".

 

So n conclusion I am suggesting three things for TO jargon.

 

• "Druggers" should just be retired. Any one who uses this is saying "I can't play this game".

• "Buyers" should no longer carry a negative implication. These players support TO and they can be beat.

• "Griefers" should be added to the mix. It is a term i n use elsewhere. These are the real people players dislike. So they need their own term.  Pl;ayers who spend $500 to get a 5% armor advantage over me aren't the problem.

 

Up with Buyers, Down with Griefers

 

 

[sensei_tanker 3,098]

The term "Drugger" has already been retired. Everyone is a drugger, no one complains in the chat about drugging. Simple. 

 

The "Buyer" slur is almost dead, because everyone is a buyer now. It will die once I leave the game, because I am the only f2p player left in this game that's above Major :( A lot of people forget that buyers not only are able to purchase paints (which don't do much), but they can still purchase crystals, have 50% protection against all your turrets, and have better stuff than you do. They also rank up quicker and gain more crystals. 

 

I'm pretty sure "Griefer" is the same thing as "Mult" or what you mean by that "Vulcan-Mammoth Dude" who just annoys the asflabqofjqefjfpmx,vn out of you. Not sure which one you mean. 

 

I think you should add "Grinder". It's the guy who plays pretty much everyday, completes all the missions, does not spend a single cent and is constantly waiting for sales. That's me. This term is almost dead.

[Pyre 3,485]

+1

 

 

 It will die once I leave the game, because I am the only f2p player left in this game that's above Major :(

 

Pu-leeze.

[sensei_tanker 3,098]

Pu-leeze.

Facts. 

[Maf 32,303]

What's worth noting is that these "griefers" are one of the main reasons why yhe game lost a ton of players over the years. People make new accounts and steamroll a bunch of genuine newbies. The griefer is satisfied, but all those new players, who got spawn-killed 50 times in a row, will just close the game and never come back.

[SporkZilla 1,775]

I've mostly been able to keep up with "Buyers" by sticking to one Hull / Turret and MUing it, but I'm struggling to keep up with Protection / Modules after the price hike (the benefits of the new system are irrelevant if you can't afford more than three Modules) and Drones are a dream.

 

My issue with "drugging" is that it's not something that everyone wants to do, and the ability to disable them in PRO battles is irrelevant because not enough enough people want to play a version of MM with no Supplies.

 

It's not about not being able to play the game (I do Supply battles on one account); it's about wanting to play a version of the game that you think is better.

Edited June 29, 2018 by SporkZilla

[Pyre 3,485]

Facts. 

Bull.

[wolverine848 13,097]

Facts. 

You would be right - if you weren't 100% wrong.  I made it Legend and have not spent a dime.

[Benefactor 6,888]

I've mostly been able to keep up with "Buyers" by sticking to one Hull / Turret and MUing it, but I'm struggling to keep up with Protection / Modules after the price hike (the benefits of the new system are irrelevant if you can't afford more than three Modules) and Drones are a dream.

 

My issue with "drugging" is that it's not something that everyone wants to do, and the ability to disable them in PRO battles is irrelevant because not enough enough people want to play a version of MM with no Supplies.

 

It's not about not being able to play the game (I do Supply battles on one account); it's about wanting to play a version of the game that you think is better.

 

I've seen players in higher ranks (Major and above) drug but have done so without the use of modules. Unless you are trying to run through a storm of flack and fire, module protection doesn't seem noticeable below 20%.

[GuidoFawkes 2,361]

why does griefer have to be a buyer?

what's the difference between someone who spends 500 euros on a low ranked account to get m3 freeze with both alterations at wo2 and a free player who gets just enough exp to complete missions everyday until he gets m3 freeze with both alterations at wo2??

they're basically the same, except at least the buyer pays.

[brohomie 45]

The term "Drugger" has already been retired. Everyone is a drugger, no one complains in the chat about drugging. Simple. 

Down at my ranks I see this whining daily. I'm called a drugger even though I don't use repair kits often (esp. when I am doomed), I like the challenge of trying to do as much damage with a sliver of my health last. most it is by people who don't realize how powerful m1.10 firebird is. 

Edited June 29, 2018 by brohomie

[ERADICATIONNATION 185]

 

In two years TO has changed a lot. Daily mission player now can earn enough Supplies that the term "Drugger" just seem comical.  Supplies are a core aspect of game play. Supplies exist to be used. Everyone has access to an adequate source of Supplies. If you are not a "Drugger" today you are just hamstringing yourself. Do not blame other players for playing the actual game.

 

The use of "Buyer" as a slur should also end. TO has many design shortcomings but in one area it deserves praise. TO allows free players to compete on a virtually even playing field with the dreaded Buyers. Yes, buyers can have a more varied garage, or a few more MU steps sooner, or buy a Kit a little before you.  But these all add up to relatively small advantage over the free player. If the free player masters the primary hull and turret it can afford to own gear as good or just slightly inferior to the "Buyer"

 

Well, as a "griefer" who's been here for five years, I simply think supplies are an awful mechanic to begin with. They're uninteresting and overpowered, making M0s as strong as M3s. Battles are reduced to tiresome slogs with these supplies, where contests are overwhelmingly decided based on what supplies are at hand and how many are left to expend. Before duels even begin, the victor can be determined simply by comparing what supplies are being used by each combatant. If both tanks are able to use drugs, then the total effect is as if they aren't even active in the first place. Matches as a whole are heavily influenced by what team is willing to expend more supplies, but even then the victor is almost never repaid thanks to Tanki's god awful economy, making battles wasted efforts. Crystals used to purchase drugs are rarely repaid, and the amount earned by missions never lasts long. Drugs simply invoke a tedious cycle of spending (time or crystals) and consuming. It's not fun or engaging in the least. 

 

I've always hated the argument you use here. So what if drugs in the game? That doesn't make them an inherently good mechanic. 

 

But your paragraph about "buyers" is even worse. You seriously downplay the effect aspects of the game like product kits and easy crystals have on balance. You mean to tell me that a product kit that allows a Lieutenant General to access M3s several long ranks before Marshal is only a "little" advantage over other players? That 400,000 crystals is only a "little" ways to go for a non-buyer? That having a pool of instant crystals for a varied garage and MUs isn't going to give buyers an upper hand, especially now where maps and opponents for regular battles are randomly determined? What a bunch of crap. Small advantage, my ass. 

 

If you wanna call me some petty name for this, go ahead. I really don't care. You're the one who's trying to justify some terrible game play mechanic and the effects of spending real money on a freakin' flash game, not me. 

[sensei_tanker 3,098]

You would be right - if you weren't 100% wrong.  I made it Legend and have not spent a dime.

Can any of you guys tell if I'm exaggerating a statement? -_- That said, only about 0.5% of the player base above Marshal has never spent any penny on the game... maybe even less. 

[GorgoBlesk 831]

You would be right - if you weren't 100% wrong. I made it Legend and have not spent a dime.

Wow. What combo did you use?

[AbsoluteZero 3,729]

In two years TO has changed a lot. Daily mission player now can earn enough Supplies that the term "Drugger" just seem comical.  Supplies are a core aspect of game play. Supplies exist to be used. Everyone has access to an adequate source of Supplies. If you are not a "Drugger" today you are just hamstringing yourself. Do not blame other players for playing the actual game.

 

So let's just flat-out retire "Drugger" shall we? OK, that was the easy one.

Everyone has access to an adequate number of supplies if they intend to play for a short time each day. Then there are those who can stay on for as long as they like who can use supplies like there is no tomorrow and still never run out. I don't believe we can put this term to bed just yet.

 

What choices does a non-buying, new player have when they join? Hulls, turrets, protection modules, drones, micro-upgrades, batteries, supplies, premium... There is no way they can compete at a similar level to buyers, even if they stick to just one combination.  So while this divide exists, the word 'buyer' will always come with negative connotations.

 

Existing players that start new accounts and then proceed to buy all of the above are not really Griefers are they.  These are people who don't like the pointy end of this game at legend level because m4's are common place and it's not always easy to win. Their satisfaction comes from keeping their k/d's high, from getting most of the battlefund and from winning all the time - this is the buzz for them. I don't think they do this just to upset newbies, they do it because they have limitations, because they don't like getting beat and it makes them feel superior or important.  They'll achieve Marshall or something around that rank and then start the process all over again, remembering to link any new accounts to their main.

 

I think the terms druggers and buyers will be around for a while but the playing field can be levelled a bit further. For a start, repair kits should be the same price as the other supplies and they should be made equally available in containers and missions as the other supplies. It's short-sighted to use income or game balance excuses for not doing this.

Edited June 30, 2018 by AbsoluteZero

[gokuMI6 1,290]

Drugger = @ByeByeBye

 

 

not the player , the name

 

 

can you please explain the griefer more ?

i am not sure i understand it clearly

 

Is it the OP guy who ruin the battle ?

or the kind we call mult/Sabeoutor ?

Edited June 30, 2018 by gokuMI6

[GuidoFawkes 2,361]

What's worth noting is that these "griefers" are one of the main reasons why yhe game lost a ton of players over the years. People make new accounts and steamroll a bunch of genuine newbies. The griefer is satisfied, but all those new players, who got spawn-killed 50 times in a row, will just close the game and never come back.

and what is this? in one topic you talk like this about such people and in another topic you glorify such people and in doing so encourage others to follow them????

 

 

this is one of the many reasons i never believe anything the clowns of the forums (aka mods) ever say.

 

if you know it's that bad for the game can't you just say you don't accept such records because it encourages people to slaughter newbies and make the game lose a ton of players?

Edited June 30, 2018 by GuidoFawkes

[Maf 32,303]

and what is this? in one topic you talk like this about such people and in another topic you glorify such people and in doing so encourage others to follow them??

this is one of the many reasons i never believe anything the clowns of the forums (aka mods) ever say.

if you know it's that bad for the game can't you just say you don't accept such records because it encourages people to slaughter newbies and make the game lose a ton of players?

We only don't accept records which encourage violation of actual game rules. Making a new account to dominate newbies is currently not against any rules.

[GuidoFawkes 2,361]

We only don't accept records which encourage violation of actual game rules. Making a new account to dominate newbies is currently not against any rules.

so as i stated.. just blindly follow the rules and what devs say and don't think for yourself.

 

what you do is making the game lose a ton of players but it's not against the rules so it's okay. It is bad for the game but... i encourage it anyway

Edited June 30, 2018 by GuidoFawkes

[LittleWillie 3,199]

The term "Drugger" has already been retired. Everyone is a drugger, no one complains in the chat about drugging. Simple. 

 

The "Buyer" slur is almost dead, because everyone is a buyer now. It will die once I leave the game, because I am the only f2p player left in this game that's above Major :( A lot of people forget that buyers not only are able to purchase paints (which don't do much), but they can still purchase crystals, have 50% protection against all your turrets, and have better stuff than you do. They also rank up quicker and gain more crystals. 

 

I'm pretty sure "Griefer" is the same thing as "Mult" or what you mean by that "Vulcan-Mammoth Dude" who just annoys the asflabqofjqefjfpmx,vn out of you. Not sure which one you mean. 

 

I think you should add "Grinder". It's the guy who plays pretty much everyday, completes all the missions, does not spend a single cent and is constantly waiting for sales. That's me. This term is almost dead.

No, "Griefer" does not men "mult"  Griefers would be like World Cup players seeing a mopes playing football then challenging them for the pitch.

 

In most online games games the term "bot" was used for what is called a "mult" in TO.  That is more than one account run by the same people.

 

I think you hav a good idea for needing a term for the patient long-term f2p player but "grinder" again is used n othr online game to means someone who plays like 20 hours ouf 24 day in day out to level up. So maybe we can come up with an aoriginal trm.

 

I've mostly been able to keep up with "Buyers" by sticking to one Hull / Turret and MUing it, but I'm struggling to keep up with Protection / Modules after the price hike (the benefits of the new system are irrelevant if you can't afford more than three Modules) and Drones are a dream.

 

My issue with "drugging" is that it's not something that everyone wants to do, and the ability to disable them in PRO battles is irrelevant because not enough enough people want to play a version of MM with no Supplies.

 

It's not about not being able to play the game (I do Supply battles on one account); it's about wanting to play a version of the game that you think is better.

At your level you gt much better ROI spending your Cry in hulls and turrets not modules.  Module strategy did gt a lot more complicated.  But the WO and NCO levels are what I mean mostly whn I talk about how Griefers can still buy a big advantage over the everyday player.

 

why does griefer have to be a buyer?

 

what's the difference between someone who spends 500 euros on a low ranked account to get m3 freeze with both alterations at wo2 and a free player who gets just enough exp to complete missions everyday until he gets m3 freeze with both alterations at wo2??

 

they're basically the same, except at least the buyer pays.

You are asking what;'s the difference between two 14-year old kids who earned their way into a grandmasters tournament.  One got there by playing winning chess. The other got there by paying $100 bore each game in order to start the game with three Queens. But let's deelve anyway.

 

Well in the first place your scenario never happens.  A free player might earn enough for a kit at wo2 but not enough to instantly MU it to m3.  he earliest ranked m2 kits instead represent the beginning of the end for the Griefer career.  A the Griefer starts to go up the WO ranks free players can close the gap enough so the kill sprees are not as easy or spree-ie. 

 

This is why Griefes ae buyers.  Early ranks past fast. Free players who gain a lot of Cry gt promoted fast too. But a Buyer can spend some cash and get that stuff buring up 0 exp points..

 

But if it did somehow happen that afree player got m3 gear at wo2 that would be what is called in the world of gaming as "Playing the game expertly at the very highest level.". Striving to play the game expertly at the highest level is, what some people suggest, the raison d'etre for the concept gaming itself.

 

 

Can any of you guys tell if I'm exaggerating a statement? -_- That said, only about 0.5% of the player base above Marshal has never spent any penny on the game... maybe even less. 

Hole gets deeper.   You have no idea what the figures are.  And when you talk about players who have spent thousands the % is even less.  

 

Drugger = @ByeByeBye

 

 

not the player , the name

 

 

can you please explain the griefer more ?

i am not sure i understand it clearly

 

Is it the OP guy who ruin the battle ?

or the kind we call mult/Sabeoutor ?

See above

[GuidoFawkes 2,361]

You are asking what;'s the difference between two 14-year old kids who earned their way into a grandmasters tournament.  One got there by playing winning chess. The other got there by paying $100 bore each game in order to start the game with three Queens. But let's deelve anyway.

 

Well in the first place your scenario never happens.  A free player might earn enough for a kit at wo2 but not enough to instantly MU it to m3.  he earliest ranked m2 kits instead represent the beginning of the end for the Griefer career.  A the Griefer starts to go up the WO ranks free players can close the gap enough so the kill sprees are not as easy or spree-ie. 

 

This is why Griefes ae buyers.  Early ranks past fast. Free players who gain a lot of Cry gt promoted fast too. But a Buyer can spend some cash and get that stuff buring up 0 exp points..

 

But if it did somehow happen that afree player got m3 gear at wo2 that would be what is called in the world of gaming as "Playing the game expertly at the very highest level.". Striving to play the game expertly at the highest level is, what some people suggest, the raison d'etre for the concept gaming itself.

it has happened

 

at corporal ther are only 4 possible missions you can get.. so if you don't get a collect supply box mission you will definately get it with your free mission change...

 

and i know someone who created more than 10 accounts and ranked them up to corporal and stayed there only doing supply missions every day... and the first account to get all the crystals  he needed (from containers) to instantly max out everything he planned to get became the account he started to play on.

 

so basically stay at corporal and only do supply missions until you get enough crystals to fundyour lifelong plan... if it takes too long then do 20 accounts and one of them will be the luckiest from containers.

 

this is very easy for anyone to do and is not even close to earning their way to the grandmasters tournament. therefore i believe that anyone who does this is a griefer all the same, except he's worse than a buyer griefer cause he doesn't even pay to cause grief to others

[r_Issimo2 1,495]

New Day New Way To Name Calling?

 

No need for this topic.

Edited June 30, 2018 by r_Issimo2

[LittleWillie 3,199]

 

 

If you wanna call me some petty name for this, go ahead. I really don't care. You're the one who's trying to justify some terrible game play mechanic and the effects of spending real money on a freakin' flash game, not me. 

I am not justifying the Supplies rules. I am making the outlandish claim that the Supplies system exists as part of TO.  When I play a game, I expect the other player to play the game by that game's rules.  You, I guess, feel other players ar beholden to your opinions on what the rules should be durnit.

 

Making posts like your or calling people "duggers" iin chat is an effort to deride the players who outlandishly play the actual game by the actual rules. This trikes me as absurd. But we all follow our own muse.

 

Everyone has access to an adequate number of supplies if they intend to play for a short time each day. Then there are those who can stay on for as long as they like who can use supplies like there is no tomorrow and still never run out. I don't believe we can put this term to bed just yet.

 

What choices does a non-buying, new player have when they join? Hulls, turrets, protection modules, drones, micro-upgrades, batteries, supplies, premium... There is no way they can compete at a similar level to buyers, even if they stick to just one combination.  So while this divide exists, the word 'buyer' will always come with negative connotations.

 

 

Second part first.  I agree that low ranking accounts are vulnerable to buyers. That is the entire point of the Griefers term discussion here.

 

But.. after a new account ranks up with every week the margin of advantage over free players grows smaller and smaller. The practical distinction all but goes away.

 

Fist part last.

 

I have played thousands of hours of free play and not spent a dime in 18 months.  Back them I bought some GBs. I have tnen of thousands of supplies in stock.  I two years of play I have used less than half the RK's I have gained. So ... no.

 

But if someone plays so much they STILL burn through their supplies then I say it is more than fair that this player cough up some cash.

[LittleWillie 3,199]

it has happened

 

at corporal ther are only 4 possible missions you can get.. so if you don't get a collect supply box mission you will definately get it with your free mission change...

 

and i know someone who created more than 10 accounts and ranked them up to corporal and stayed there only doing supply missions every day... and the first account to get all the crystals  he needed (from containers) to instantly max out everything he planned to get became the account he started to play on.

 

so basically stay at corporal and only do supply missions until you get enough crystals to fundyour lifelong plan... if it takes too long then do 20 accounts and one of them will be the luckiest from containers.

 

this is very easy for anyone to do and is not even close to earning their way to the grandmasters tournament. therefore i believe that anyone who does this is a griefer all the same, except he's worse than a buyer griefer cause he doesn't even pay to cause grief to others

It is always possible to cite an extreme or outlier case.  You friend spent weeks or months to set this up? Somehow I do not think TO has seen this repeated hundreds or thousands of times.  Buyers otoh are common.  That is why you do not see chat filled with ppl hating on "those not-playing-savin-up-for-months-Corporal- accounts but you do see ppl hating on "buyers".

[arlo7 130]

It is always possible to cite an extreme or outlier case.  You friend spent weeks or months to set this up? Somehow I do not think TO has seen this repeated hundreds or thousands of times.  Buyers otoh are common.  That is why you do not see chat filled with ppl hating on "those not-playing-savin-up-for-months-Corporal- accounts but you do see ppl hating on "buyers".

Not many people hate on buyers, because 1) it's their choice of buyer, nobody has asked them for that. 2) Almost every players already bought once, I'd say minimum 85% of the community. 3) Don't forget that without "Buyers", there is absolutely no game. Keep this in mind...