I see this phrase circle this forum so much it sickens me, so I ask of you, supporters of "fair fights"...

...what is a fair fight in DAoC ?

Anyone that says 8v8 gets a free moron stamp for their forehead.

well it should be a fight where both parties have the chance to win, no matter if its 8vs8, 8vs9 or 6vs8.
If a random, lowRR, non-teamspeaking group of 8 people loses against a highRR, teamspeaking 8people guildgroup, it should be their right to increase their number to 10, 11, 12 people without getting flamed on irc.

But often, the number is increased so much, that the highRR, teamspeaking 8people guildgroup needs to increase their number too. But as such groups normally dont want to play in another setup than the ones they are used to, they will just log out and flame on irc about the damn zergig enemies ^^

why did u open a new thread? ...pls

use this one:

http://www.uthgard.the-bart.org/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&p=71859#71859

it's something you can't understand flaming , it seems...

my definition is close to the rector's definition.

i would add that a fair fight is a fight in which one the skill of the players counts.

if you have a mass of guys that can do anything and will win just cause they are more or more powerfull, it's not fair.

if the group that will play the better will win, i think it's a fair fight.

for me a fair fight would be sth like EDN vs AV or MB vs EDN etc guild grps with nearly same skill fighting grp vs grp rest isnt fair in most of the cases

Fair fight for me is ganking lows.

Rector wrote:well it should be a fight where both parties have the chance to win, no matter if its 8vs8, 8vs9 or 6vs8.

Chance to win is impossible to determine, due to every individual player being relative.

Rector wrote:If a random, lowRR, non-teamspeaking group of 8 people loses against a highRR, teamspeaking 8people guildgroup, it should be their right to increase their number to 10, 11, 12 people without getting flamed on irc.

Having the right to outnumber doesn't mean it's fair.

speebo wrote:why did u open a new thread? ...pls

Because it's a different topic, durrrrrrrrrrr.

panachier wrote:it's something you can't understand flaming , it seems...

I'm gonna save my answer to this for later.

panachier wrote:my definition is close to the rector's definition.

He didn't define anything, he just stated a hypothesis.

panachier wrote:i would add that a fair fight is a fight in which one the skill of the players counts.

Better ones win eh ? but in the next paragraph...

panachier wrote:if you have a mass of guys that can do anything and will win just cause they are more or more powerfull, it's not fair.

... you say it's not fair.

panachier wrote:if the group that will play the better will win, i think it's a fair fight.

Not necessarily. In a 8v20 situation (i.e), even if you lose you may have played better, but you still lost.

malle wrote:for me a fair fight would be sth like EDN vs AV or MB vs EDN etc guild grps with nearly same skill fighting grp vs grp rest isnt fair in most of the cases

High RR is not a measure of skill.

A fair fight cant be decided if its fair before hand, but only after the battle (or after a few battles).

Ive only ever been in one or two battles where everyone in the group dies except me, and everyone in the opposing group dies except one. Now that was fair.

If theres a scenario where it's alb VS mid, and alb win, then mid win, then alb win, then mid win the fight, players and the setup is fair.

DarkRef wrote:A fair fight cant be decided if its fair before hand, but only after the battle (or after a few battles).

/applause

Finally someone understands.

sure, but if u know ur enemy u can guess weather it will be fair or not

Flamingfury wrote:

Rector wrote:well it should be a fight where both parties have the chance to win, no matter if its 8vs8, 8vs9 or 6vs8.

Chance to win is impossible to determine, due to every individual player being relative.

Chance to win can be estimated from the prior fights, example:

8 Hibs meet 8 Albs. Albs lose.
They meet again. Albs lose again. Now Albs they take another player.
The 9 Albs meet the 8 Hibs again. Hibs lose. Now it would be fair from the hibs if they tried to beat the 9 Albs with the same 8 people group.

It would be unfair if the 8 Hibs directly extend to 9, so that the 9 Albs probably will lose every fight again. This could still be done if the next two wins also go to the albs.

Of course this is often not possible, cause for example often friends want to play together, and you cant just take one of them and tell to the other: sorry, we got only room for one of you, try again later. Cause this is unfair for the human that sits on front of the computer ^^

Thats one reason why most fights are not fair.

If there are many guildmates that want to do RvR, its unfriendly to pick only some and tell to the others: you not, please do something else and ask again later.

Rector wrote:Of course this is often not possible, cause for example often friends want to play together, and you cant just take one of them and tell to the other: sorry, we got only room for one of you, try again later. Cause this is unfair for the human that sits on front of the computer ^^

And thats the main problem...thats the point the elitist players often miss to increase their own rp flow. The only unfair fight is to exclude willing players to participate in RvR as a realm...not as 8 vs 8 only. New players will never have a chance in 8 vs 8 in this manner against a high rr sg op ts progamer rr=skill fg.

A fair fight is a fight where afterwards the defeated side wants to get back into the action with their enemies because they believe they could have won, period.

That's why I don't like zerging or broading for "MORE ALLIES PLS, ALL COME"!

I don't want to 'win' every time from my enemy in daoc, I want to fight someone who can put up a challenge. If this means fighting 2fg's with 1fg where the 1fg dactually stands a chance I rather dont play it with even numbers than where the 1fg would ask for another or where the 2fgs split up so that ones side get overpowered.

These cases are rarely seen and most of the time fights aren't fair so they won't come back with the same setup/numbers or they will just log, but if they do occur, it's the best PvP there is. Asking for fair fights won't help either, it's just a bit coincidence wether you have decent allies or wether the enemy forces have. There should be a balance in strength, not in numbers.

The problem with bigger grps than a fg is that there's no limit. When you hear a zerg is active somewhere taking your keeps, who will not want to defend their keep? The original fg will grow to perhaps 25 when the 'zerg' they were talking about was only 15 man strong. This way they other side will do the same and you end up with 25 vs 25 where the one sie will weaken due to leaving allies. This will have the effect that that side will get farmed so they'll all leave and the action is over in about 1hr.

Conclusion: just play the game , a thread won't solve this 'problem', if you can even call it that.

Balanced fights are most fun, but you can't force them.

For me Epic battles (nice and long one vs one or armys of players) are the best. With fg vs fg you know after some runs wether you have a chance to win or not. In a zerg its a mixture of skill, rr/lvl and luck so the end is never clear.

same if only 2 zergs are running around ...