I’m sure there are ways to throw as Alch but I think they’d all be hard af to prove
Of course, but as I pointed out, I’m talking about alchs who admit it point-blank without shame
I’d say that as long as there was some incentive to win (meaning survive) it wouldn’t be gamethrowing, like in this situation. HOWEVER I understand that this guy had the chance to win with Unseen but because the Alch was threatened, he decided to ruin your day by siding with BD King. It’s a thin line, but if you guys hadn’t threatened to kill the Alch, maybe he would’ve sided with you guys.
It’s like man’s inherent free will and how we all don’t like being forced to do something. Because he was forced to do it or be killed, the Alch chose to rebel at the cost of his own life. But if asked politely and given a choice, he would’ve listened. As an Alch I usually bomb people who give me death threats but ally with people who ask nicely, be it BD, Unseen, Cult, or the NK. It isn’t gamethrowing.
Moral of the story: be polite to your neighborhood alchemist.
1 Like
you’re basically saying revenge gamethrowing is okay
i’m not sure how almost every response in this thread is not understanding the OP
either an alch getting himself killed on purpose is gamethrowing or it isn’t
why is this so hard to understand?
It’s because unlike other classes, an Alchemist doesn’t have teammates to work with. They are basically, a solo wildcard. Gamethrowing would be where your actions hinder the chance of your faction’s victory, which ruins the game. But as an Alchemist, you’re not obligated to help anyone win. It’s Neutral.
1 Like
bro, suicide is against alch’s objective which is gamethrowing, the rules say it clearly going against your objective is gamethrowing
I mean obviously if a BD or Unseen did this it’s obvious gamethrowing, but Alchemists aren’t required to listen to their Unseen commanders.
1 Like
it’s gamethrowing according to the rules right now. there is no exception in the rules for alchs or any neuts for that matter
The thing was that it’s not a guaranteed suicide to do it. You could’ve been bluffing as Unseen or so on. It’s not like the Alch pressed a suicide button or something. If he had SS potions at that point in the game, you would not consider it gamethrowing, right? So why is it any different now?
The ones who killed the Alchemist were Unseen.
2 Likes
The thing was that it’s not a guaranteed suicide to do it.
doesn’t matter, he admitted to suiciding, please don’t miss the point, i’m not talking of an alch trying to win but dying, i’m talking about an alch who got killed on purpose and we know he got killed on purpose because he admitted to it in-game and in post-game chat, you are missing the point
according to the rules that is clearly admitting to gamethrowing
lmao i just read the updated rules:
No Gamethrowing. Going against your goal in any case will be considered gamethrowing. Neutrals cannot gamethrow.
what?
This is WIP – there will be exceptions (like outing yourself d1, not protecting your contract, etc). The main point is … the way gamethrowing is described in this thread is not gamethrowing.
You’re NK - that is, neutral killer. You can side with whoever you want. If it doesn’t work out, you can blow them off at the last second. It’s not troll – it’s neutral.
I still feel like some Neutrals, the NKs as well as Mercenaries, Sellswords, Inquisitor and Scorned have to abide by the rules
It’s true – we don’t want people leaving or outing themselves d1, going against contract, etc. OP caught the edit literally seconds after it was updated while I was still editing before the change was even announced. The current version looks like this:
I updated OP to prevent confusion in red.
3 Likes
Note that this is a separate rule:
Don’t leave the game early. It is okay to leave while dead.
This also applies to neutrals. I’d like to work rules as short as possible so it doesn’t get TL;DR, but we may add a mention that leaves while alive are also punishable. Anyway, WIP~
1 Like
After discussion, we have decided not to change the rules (although I did specify “including neutrals” on the leaving alive rule), as the rules have always reflected our original intention:
Alchemists choosing a side is not going against their own objective.
If they want to choose and they still aim to win, that’s not going against their objective – just a perk of being neutral.
2 Likes
Alchemists choosing a side is not going against their objective. If they want to choose and they still aim to win, that’s just a perk of being neutral [in most cases]. (from Reddit)
okay that answer satisfies me
