i can post in any given thread and attempt to change the vernacular of said thread, had bigpocks post said "meta abuse" I would've called him/her stupid and moved on.
I literally freaking said the term meta abuse is stupid, meaning it's wrong, non existent. there is no such thing as meta abuse because connor;
Sanctify13h 43m the term meta abuse is stupid, because using meta by the definition of it in one game should be meta abuse.
if you're saying "people are calling it abuse when it's not" then why are you answering "whats the true meaning of meta abuse" with "people wrongly call meta abuse x"
i mean my vry first post, and the first post in this thread was "The term meta abuse is stupid"
he changed the stupid term into something a little better, meta gaming and said that if you "meta game a lot" it could be taken as excessive meta gaming. Excessive is a lot better than using the word abuse idk why people keep saying abuse.
you're nitpicking something that doesn't need to be, i'm saying his understanding of meta gaming, not calling it meta abuse was the only definition that was plausable at the time (on page 2) and still to this page.
notice is aid the only decent definition, and not "This is exactly what meta abuse is"
this has to be the 100th time i've agreed with connor or partially agreed with connor and he acts like me and him are a completely different spectrum of the argument.
For one, learning and using meta in an environment where meta becomes everything isn't "abuse". When I joined the site it took me a few games to get c/ping down and I lost a few lynches simply because I didn't paste my report fast enough.
You can't see that now because that's generations ago, but in that meta those loses were my fault.
//////////////// that explains meta, doesn't explain the "abuse" factor (which doesn't exist btw) the only thing that can be added to meta is excessive metagaming. And that's what people are calling "abuse"
all i said was bigpocks definition was the only decent one posted, i didn't say it was accurate.
i also said it because his definition didn't put "meta abuse" because that's stupid, it's just meta gaming. And then when it happens a lot over the course of a round it's excessive meta gaming.
ya, so call that meta-gaming and call the other stuff cheating. devante's right, the other stuff is basically role-sharing via set lines of text or whatever
Seeing as you've yet to get this right or flesh it out, you shouldn't be trying to call it anything. What purpose doesn't victimizing friend play serve? All of your "14 days ago" games have Radiofire or Matthelders in them, 2 of our better comp players. Outside of that you rarely play, so how can you target active players when based on your history you'd do the exact same thing?
We should be encouraging this, because the more people in tables having fun, the better comp becomes. If 2 people can play with each other and hash out victories regardless of alignment, why stop this? The core of running has always been having strong friends/player to rely on. Otherwise you're likely to be stuck in a table with an irrational and compulsive clear griping on Skype. All you're doing is making our user base smaller and decentivizing people from playing.
