Myth)I(Apollo

The honor code has not been finalized.


Also, comittee members, make sure that you cast your vote on the honor code by the end of tomorrow. The separate vote for punishment will be held on another occasion due to lack of insight and input.

once again, the honor code and the punishment will recieve separate votes.


1. Once you ally, you can't unally. However, honest mistakes early in the game may be fixed.

ie: allying the wrong color

2. No trading resources nor items between teams.

3. Participants will save replays upon request. Requests must be justified.

4. Verbal communication is ok but must be said in "all chat" so that 2 teams cannot share information exclusively amongst eachother because that would be cooperation.

5. No cooperation with other teams.

if you need an example go to the controversial 1st game thread


Punishments

1. Violation of the honor code will result in the individual loss of ellegibility two matches.

2. If one team breaks the honor code during a match, then they automatically lose the game despite the results and recieve an additional loss afterwards.

3. If a team that played clean wins a match where another or more teams broke the honor code then that team will recieve a full win.

4. Punishments apply to anyone taking an active role in the upcoming "incidents"

The extent to which one participated in any violation can and will be interpreted if the need arises.



note: feel free to criticize (the code, not me) and if your on the comittee than give me input asap.

shocker

well if u brake the code do u lose?

if so if its giving info to the over time in privet or wisping them and the team getting the info does not say any thing who loses? giving info, taking info, or both?

y cant i criticize u?

Myth)I(Apollo

so far the post-game punishment has been to take 2 games away from any player who instigates or plays a big role in violating the honor code. That includes captains and co-captains.

ie: if a non captain status player violates his first game out of 5, then he may only play in 2 more after that.


the direct consequences regarding the results are the game are yet to be decided

Lohengrin

Hm, my example did indeed include speaking in all-chat so I don't really have a problem with rule #4.

After all, how hidden can your intention be when your privately disclosing information to one specific team?

I do have one concern though; how will lies be taken? I mean, the rules say that exclusively talking to a team = cooperation, but if the information is not valid then it is deception. Although I guess a simple scout can determine the accuracy of the information... Still, I see some potential in the option.

Wait, if the people know the rule, then any form of privately communicating must be a lie unless the person chooses to break this "honor code". Hm, well, maybe one could just hope that the other team is full of morons or harass one vulnerable and specific individual. Hahah.

Myth)I(Furies

I still think that Apollo is right, talking in private chat exclusively with another team = cooperation. However, Lohen is right. If we're using the Broken Alliances = World War analogy...What if say Germany wanted to leak intelligence to only one specific country? It's not like they would be forced to leak intelligence to something equivalent to a 'public chat', right?

Myth)I(Apollo

it is only ok in war to do so because cooperation is also allowed in wars. cooperation is not allowed in ba therefore leaking info to one exclusive team is not ok in ba. The argument you guys are making is analogous to this: Your not allowed to be christian but your allowed to be mormon. The comparison might sound dumb but if you compare the variables (cooperation/christian and exclusive leaking/mormon) then its quite valid seeing as how just like cooperation relates to many forms and acts of cooperation, being a christian is an umbrella term for anyone belonging to any one denomination. ie: the church of latter day saints (mormons).

no more exact comparisons

Myth)I(Furies

For the sake of argument, I'll use one last 'direct comparison'. You're a history buff Apollo, you should appreciate this. Say we compare BA to a major war. More specifically, WWII. There were two teams, essentially, in WWII. There were smaller teams I'm sure, as you may care to mention, with different objections, but we might as well just label them as creeps, because that's about all they represent. There were the Allies and the Axis powers. Yes we can argue as well that the axis powers, in many locations and times, did better than the Allied powers in battle. But we can't argue that there were more nations under the Allied Powers, and that they had superior resources. It is therefore best to consider the allies and axis powers as two teams, and the allied team would be the stacked team (Apollo shocker zuey for example). The axis team wins many battles, does well for awhile, but eventually loses. There was no third team in any major war like that. An example of what happened the first match in BA, with everyone teaming up against team one, would be this. Say...the arab nations remain untouched in WWII. They get together, form a coalition known as idk, something crazy like muhammed jihad. They team up on the allies with the axis. Two seperate entities, teams of nations, against one. THAT is teaming, THAT is the line. It just doesn't happen. Now there are always wars where one nation is ganged up on by two nations, and so on with all the combinations, but there are essentially two sides, just one with superior resources, hence better players, or better bases and heroes. To most my logic might not make sense, but it makes an example that explains in a way how we can draw a line, as lohen put it, through the sharing of information. Leaking intelligence happens, but the whole arab and axis vs allies? No. Leaking true and false information to other teams is a legitimate strategy. You must make the best judgement whether to trust them or not.
This is more than likely going to get 'debunked' as Apollo would put it, so good luck with that, but I'm pretty sure that it can't be done.

UnHolyMessenger

I'm fine with how the honor code is. But I would like some clarification on what exactly cooperation is plainly and simple.
And also how would we know if someone is talking to another player in say a whisper? It won't come up in the replay. Do we expect them to turn themselves in? Or are we just going to make an educated guess as to whether they worked together?

tiredofexcuses2

Leaking information should be fair you out of all people should go with this. You are the biggest base lamer next to me and I have to say that base laming and leaking information fall under the same category of desperation. Also what if the leaked information is a bluff and you attack the team you cooperated with? You are not thinking outside the box and you have tried to sabootage ur fair amount of games. I am not trying to bash on you, but when I offered this rule somewere on the pollama.com forums no one seemed to notice but when it was used on you, a big deal was made about it.

Myth)I(Apollo

Theres only so much that we can do. We have to use our best judgement in many cases and thats what we will have to do in that situation.

tiredofexcuses2

I am not going to agree to such a rule unless it becomes habit in games.... It has happened once lets see if it continues before we act, after all this is basically a draft war season in progress, not really the real thing.

Myth)I(Apollo

so tired why not wait until the world melts before we tackle global warming.

its better to troubleshoot problems rather than wait till its absolutely necessary to solve it.

UnHolyMessenger

To agree with apollo, if we wait to long it may not be so easy to stop it. Right now it's only happened once and hasn't become widespread so it is pretty easy to stop and reinforce.

OberynTheViper

most of the code makes sense, and i assume wen u say no trading u mean between teams..not individual team members, but what of dragons? do they fall under the code whether to use them or not? or rather rules of our clan/draft matches? since im not sure which it pertains to, and exactly where these 2 groups separate im jw, cuz ppl are mad about their ability to base lame especially wen u got say 2 or 3, but we agree that base laming is part of the game..so then do dragons come into play full on? or are dragons allowed? but under the code that ur team will not gang lame with them? thoughts people?

"A Martell sun, but ten years too young, Tyrion thought as he reined up, too fit as well, and far too fierce. "

"Unbent, Unbowed, Unbroken"

Myth)I(Apollo

good question. I think the use of dragons should be decided prior to the start of each match. Putting it in the honor code would sound absurd

Lohengrin

You wound me. After all, I did agree to limiting leaking intelligence to all-chat in the first post while asking a question that has yet to be answered.

King Stubby

BROKEN alliances HONOR code- it's a paradoxical oxymoron! seriously, i think anything should go unless it's cheating!

Myth)I(Apollo

furies you are a *******. You forget one thing. There usually is no 3rd side in wars because they are ALLOWED TO HAVE UNLIMITED ALLIES. For example in WW1 England basically recruited Arabs (or creeps as u put it) in order to fight the Ottoman Empire. In total war, alliances dont need to tip toe around in order to fight another alliance. They simply ally which once again reduces it to 2 alliances fighting against eachother. After the war they may break up and fight eachother with once again 2 factions. The magic number is 2.

oh yea and lets say your illegitimate data doesnt forfeit your argument. YOUR NOT ARGUING AGAINST ME AT ALL. If you read the god damn code, theres nothing in there saying no talking. Your only qualifying my argument, ty.

overview: In war u can ally whoever you want and however many u want. In ba there are set teams and set rules. You must "cooperate" not ally because of the ally limit. DUH!

Debunked your 1st argument. It may have sounded elegant but the data was way off. Don't use analogies and comparisons unless you understand all variables. thats rule #2 in debating

culdnt "debunk" your 2nd argument because it only agrees with my honor code.


so now that furies unofficially agreed with my honor code, lets move on please and vote?

Myth)I(Apollo

tired previous to your post about unlimited info leaking, the honor code didnt prohibit unlimited info leaking. So if you ever did say anything about it after the creation of the honor code, then your input was more of a qualifier or agreement to the already present rule.

UnHolyMessenger

As far as the punishment goes I think it should be like a strikes sort of thing.
Example: first time you break the code, you and you're team forfeits the game(receives a loss for that game) and must leave it, if you do not leave the people who played on that team will not be allowed to play again that season. No re-pick.
2nd strike: You receive two loses not including the forfeit of the game you broke the code in.
3rd strike: Whoever broke the code, accomplice or the main code breaker, will not be allowed to play again that season.
What do you think?

Myth)I(Apollo

well the vote has been passed

5/6 - zuey didnt vote yet so starting now, captains and team leaders will tell their team abide by the rules. The punishment for the time being will be the ones listed.

LordSnow

The code as an idea, seems like it will work. I have so much stuff going on right now, so its nearly impossible for me to focus. If you knew how many hours it took to write my last post to furies.... I will add much more input later, to see if any ideas might need tweeked.

King_Leopold

bumpo!!

Go to this link, now. [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

Stark

You, sir, are a great man. Can't wait to see Dorne + Targaryan = destruction in the upcoming years. =P