Should losers in wars wear sigs of shame?

[Neimenljivi]

First off, this is to be ignored for the next topic I am about to post, the only connection between the two is that one got me the idea of the other.

So anyway, there used to be quite a lot of wars in Quantum back in the day. There still are some, but, only naturally, with less active players that also means less wars.
However there still are some wars, some that are made known to public, some that are not. In either case, in pretty much every war there is a victor and a loser. These are, of course, determined through various factors. But most importantly, some people don't want to play by the book in wars. They seek a way around it.

Anyway, should the losers and these people who do not war properly (eg. those who build no stats, just one stat and use it to snipe the other party) be forced to wear a sig of shame on the forums for a certain period of time?

This would ensure the wars are fought with honour and that people try their darnedest to win a war.

The period of time they are forced to wear this sig? Well imho a good period would be 100 posts made by them since starting to wear the sig or 1 week - whichever is longer.

Discuss please. Once again, this has nothing to do with the thread I am about to post, the loser will not wear such a sig since it is only being discussed now.
If you are for this - say yay and if you are not for this, say nay. Please offer an explanation along yay or nay (especially for nay).

~Jack

[Juliette]

I like the idea.

[Aisar Saqib]

Great one Jack ....

you looking in a bad-ass mood

[Neimenljivi]

Well for one, it would make sure people fight the wars the way they are supposed to be fought. So it's not just me being in a bad-ass mood There are a couple of changes I'd like to see in Quantum and the Quantum forums, and making sure people fight the wars the way they are supposed to, is one of these changes.

I am awaiting to hear more people's take on this, though. Unless I am presented with a good reason why not to go ahead with this, I probably will.

Another thing I have forgotten to mention is that the victor will decide whether or not they want their foe to wear the sig of shame - this should help with people being respectful towards each-other even when in war. After all, being disrespectful will make the victor far more interested in seeing their foe ashamed even further by them having to wear the sig of shame.

~Jack

[Jimbo 5.3]

But most importantly, some people don't want to play by the book in wars. They seek a way around it.

What exactly are the "rules" of war?

[Neimenljivi]

Usually they are made by the challenger - the one who declares the war, but they usually mean fighting with honour - which means no sniping. If your enemy is courteous enough to build stats for you to take down, you have to build stats in return, not just snipe with building attack which you then sell after massing anyway

~Jack

[leeuloop1987]

I am for it but I also sell my defenses off when I know trouble is coming my way

[Neimenljivi]

I am for it but I also sell my defenses off when I know trouble is coming my way

Well if you know you are going to be massed I understand cutting off your losses, and there's nothing wrong in it. What's wrong is that the people who accept war challenges or even make them themselves sit stateless while their enemy builds stuff for them to destroy. If you destroy something, it's only fair you also build something and give your enemy the same courtesy as they've given you. It is wrong (by the opinion of pretty much the whole community), in such wars, to mass and then sell and sit stateless again

~Jack

[Tetrismonkey]

War isn't fair. The ultimate goal in war is to deal as much damage to your enemy while minamizing your own. These games give you the freedom to fight how ever you want.

[Master Rahl]

But most importantly, some people don't want to play by the book in wars. They seek a way around it.

What exactly are the "rules" of war?

kill. and not to be killed. force your ideas and ways on others by use of force. you know simple things.

And topic: yes I think this is a good thing, but I would say wear the tags a bit longer than just a week.

[smooshable]

I would be concerned about anything that would discourage people from using the quantum forums. I kinda worry that this might do that.

[Neimenljivi]

This wouldn't be only in Q forums, they would wear the sig throughout all the forums. Only the wars would be waged in Q game and forums, so I don't think it would actually change how people deal within these forums

~N

[Tetrismonkey]

I disagree. Sure most adults could deal with some.humiliation but not all. Not only that you have kids playing to.

[Neimenljivi]

Hmm perhaps the sig would be put in spoiler? Only the words "I lost a war" be put above the spoiler?

All the feedback is appreciated and considered

~Jack

[Master Rahl]

I disagree. Sure most adults could deal with some.humiliation but not all. Not only that you have kids playing to.

This is a point and I would love to fight you for...but everyone needs to feel special.

Following that idea what if a permanent tag in sig for wars won?(for all wars not just quantum)