In a word, harsh.
Not the rules as such, but the fact that In my opinion it wasn't well advertised and caught undeserving folk on the hop, as opposed to the presumed targets being the low end stuffed alts that are in there riding on other players coat-tails.
Bearing in mind that both Patrick and I try to keep abreast of what is new, something like this would have warranted a news article had we seen it.
I can recall people asking for clarification, and I will be honest, I simply assumed they had it wrong because a cursory search gleaned no rule change that I could find pertaining to this.
It is only with a repost and having it pointed out that I can honestly say that yes, it was there in black and white.
A quote springs to mind.
" ...You hadn't exactly gone out of your way to call attention to them had you? I mean like actually telling anyone or anything.'
' But the plans were on display...'
'On display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find them.'
' `That's the display department.'
`With a torch.'
`Ah, well the lights had probably gone.'
`So had the stairs.'
`But look you found the notice didn't you?'
`Yes,' said Arthur, `yes I did. It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying "Beware of The Leopard".'
-- Douglas Adams.
OK, perhaps a little harsh since a number of people had actually spotted it, but I think the point remains that it could have been advertised more. A post of its own for starters rather than stuck in the middle of the whole rule list.
Since the devs are in communication with all the news sites, we could have even been asked to advertise this change for maximum coverage.
Perhaps a lesson for the future, because hindsight is always 20-20.
But let us turn to the heart of the matter and see how it can be addressed moving forward.
Was the object to stop campers from getting freebies by riding in on peoples coattails, or is it to promote good play?
Does it stop the campers? Yes, I'd say it does. They now have to at least make some attacks in order to get anything, and they need to be high enough to stand a chance. Gone are the days when a level 10 account could earn 80 ton mechs for free, plus the skill points to be able to use them.
I would say however it penalises those who turn up and are willing, able and ready to fight, but find themselves simply outclassed.
I have been the 'tail end Charlie' of my clan a number of times, and I'm well aware of how hard it can be to get wins. Its not impossible, just an uphill struggle.
You can catch specialists out of formation. You can study replays and search for a viable target, maybe not always the one that is lowest level. Sometimes you just take a 'Hail Mary' and score a touchdown.
Somebody who fights like that has turned up to have a go. They are legitimately attempting to be competitive, and while they may be murderously out of their league, they are willing.
I wouldn't penalise anyone who was willing...
The thing is, its subjective. Its very hard to code into the game. It needs judgement, and intervention by a human hand.
It's not something that the devs would want to get involved with, since they are already tasked hard.
But you know, pretty much all sports have an appeal process.
Caveat: I'm talking here about medal awards, not the bonus prizes. Yes, there are people who will use sportsmanship and allow an opponent the chance to get their bonus, while others will not because they believe it should be earned legitimately. I'm not getting into that debate.
But in the Soccer World Cup, the goalkeepers on the winning team still get their medal, even though they will never score a goal... theirs was a different contribution to the team and the victory. Just bear that in mind.
So what if there were a mechanism where shortly after the war a player could lodge an appeal. We have players of good standing in the community who could be trusted to make an unbiased decision... or more than one, from different clans, just in case.
The burden of providing proof is on the person lodging the appeal of course, probably with permalinks or screenshots.
"Look, I tried the bottom guy in each fight but they were too strong so I stopped. Here are the links..."
"Check here, XXX player was attacking ants so I thought I'd catch them out of formation but they swapped back too quick..."
"I only got 2 wins, but my spec got 7 def wins..."
If they contributed, or they look like they turned up to make a go of it, then yes the adjudicators could contact the devs and say it appears legitimate, give them their prize.
Cumbersome, yes... any appeal is. But it does at least give a chance of redressing an injustice.
Oh, one final thing, and I'm sorry for this Patrick.
Had I been on the appeal panel, yes, def wins would be in your favour, but lack of attacks (RL or not, its happens to us all) would have gone against you. Not sure how I would adjudicate on that.
Submitted by David McCallum : #701548