As for rushing wins, I won't agree that it's 'fine,' unless it can be shown to not discourage enjoyable gameplay for the other team involved. I don't like losing of course, but if I know what I did wrong then I can improve and do better. But if I have no concept of how I lost other than the opposing team have 6x as many 'decent' players, then I can't improve. This process will occur over and over again for new players, discouraging them from playing, and it will degenerate the meta and gameplay with the more experienced ones.
I would 100% agree with you if it happened "over and over again" for me. I'm no expert at the game at all, but in a few months of playing TD I've seen a party of > 3 join my game maximum five times, so in my experience it wasn't a repeated thing that discouraged me from learning the game. I usually play TD at the bottom of the playercount though in terms of time(700-1000 players online). so that might be why.
That said, I absolutely agree with everything else you've said. The sexism, toxicity, trolling, and threatening are just awful, and it hurts me that anyone has had to go through that, especially in this community.
Thank you. I understand that not everyone is like that, and I am very much grateful for that. At the time, I was not aware of rules, banning, etc., but I began doing that, and I will definitely continue to do this in the future. I am only bringing this up because it could really affect someone, such as a kid playing this game. I only wish that these kinds of "experienced" players actually cared about the integrity of the game and the betterment of the TD Community, rather than prioritizing rushing wins and promoting a toxic environment, which is further worsened by big parties.
honestly, this is most likely why the gamemode doesnt grow too much. rushing keeps people from learning the basics of the game, as they die instantly. the toxic behavoir of some LB players only demotivates people from playing the server in general. its just a game and people get too serious over it, just because they lose once. this is literally why i personally lost my interest in most gaming, it became too toxic over the last few years!
I think a lot of people love this game bcs they get to chill and play with there friends,6v6 is perfect imo and it would be a huge uneeded change to make it less.
6v6 only works out the best when playing with friends but random people who dont read chat/dont speak your language makes it a huge pain, especially against a full party/LB team
First, before I react to anything, I wanna summarise this thread a little. Because this thread started as a "Should we limit team size?", then evolved into "Should we limit party size?" and now I want to react to the "toxicity/bullying/trolling" topic. Every one of those are different topics, I will also dedicate a small portion of my answer to the "Should we limit party size?", but my main focus will be on the toxicity.
Toxicity in TD
Definition of "Toxicity in TD"
(Green parts is considered toxicity as I see it, red could be considered toxicity but I won't discuss that in here because it needs far more attention than just "being discussed")
Let's define "toxicity in TD" first, so we know what we are talking about. In my opinion toxicity includes the following:
Trolling by teaching newbies wrong things such as "Witches are good for EXP" or "Oh no, we can't defend those Giants (which is a little outdated atm)".
Trolling by joining the opponent's team and placing bad towers/stealing coins with Inferno's
If conversations like "how to play" and to answer that "send leach" are happening in global chat between party members, I don't think it can be considered toxicity but should be considered as joking. Because we all know you can't send a tower right?
The things I have never seen and I will not be reacting on (and will not be considered to me as "Toxicity in TD" are these:
If those things are happening, may I redirect you to https://cbecrft.net/playersafety? Because these things should not be discussed in a thread, but told to Admins so they can actually do something about it immediately. This is in most countries not allowed and can get you arrested. That's why I think you are in the wrong place if you are discussing this.
Generalisation of Parties
I get the feeling that all "parties" from "those at the top" are being generalised as parties that toxify the community. This is a bold statement and going too far in my opinion. Most parties are quite nice to other players in my experience and if someone is like: "how did you do that" or "can you teach me" and there is in fact a spot free, most parties from "those at the top" will invite that player and try to teach them. However, this can not be done most of the time, communication is an important issue and the willingness to be taught. There are a lot of amateurs who think they know better or do not understand what you are telling them.
What I'm trying to say here is that you are generalising parties too much and putting them all in one box, however, we are talking about the parties that are toxic here so let's move on to that part.
Toxic parties
This is a serious problem and I understand plus share your thoughts on this one. I am completely aware that there are lb players who go too far in the jokes and that it is becoming toxic behaviour. This should not be tolerated and is in fact, already punishable. Feel free to report such behaviour using https://reports.cubecraft.net to report them, you may report them using one of the following offenses: Swearing/Bullying, Trolling/Camping/Griefing or Chat trolling.
What I also want to emphasise is the fact that toxicity doesn't necessarily have to do with TD or parties. Toxicity exists in every game, even outside of CubeCraft Games and CCG is definitely not one of the more toxic places to play games.
Solving toxicity with limiting party size is also not an effective solution, if I were a toxic player I'd be toxic with 6 player as well as with 2 player parties. I don't see the difference.
Dartz showed a video of a party being toxic too, in that video there was evidence of the toxicity of a party that consisted of multiple of "those at the top(?)". However, in that same video, the team Dartz was in, started the conversation with a provoking and slightly toxic message. Being prejudiced most of the time, "those at the top", can easily feel offended by such messages. If they react in a toxic way back it can only be seen as slightly logical in my opinion.
This was said to CrystalDrop (one of the most or imo THE most respected and well known players of "those at the top"), the non-ranker prejudiced her as a toxic player.
Who is behind the toxicity of TD?
I'm curious who you are referring to when talking about the parties which are toxic and actually anyone being toxic in TD. Could you name a few? I don't know if this will help the discussion but if you are willing to address them, then go ahead.
Also, in my experience and hearing from others, I must bring to attention that heavenly55 is also pretty toxic. Multiple people have experienced and seen toxic chat behaviour coming from heavenly55. That's why I'm heavily surprised that they themselves started the subject. Could you explain your previous toxic behaviour and why you are against it right now?
Limiting Party Sizes
We discussed the "Limitation of Party Sizes" in a private Discord and came to the conclusion that this was not an effective solution for whatever problem it solves.
If there's a different problem which limiting party sizes is meant to fix, please explain and I'll make sure to discuss this with multiple people.
I hope this answered most of your concerns, if there's anything more that I can do, let me hear.
I can also make a message about trolling/toxic behaviour and post it in the Discord server in my signature, in the Tower Defence forums and in the newspaper TCCT of CubeCraft. If you are positive that it might help, then please let me know and I'll make this reality.
Have a nice day and don't let games influence your real life too much.
First, before I react to anything, I wanna summarise this thread a little. Because this thread started as a "Should we limit team size?", then evolved into "Should we limit party size?" and now I want to react to the "toxicity/bullying/trolling" topic. Every one of those are different topics, I will also dedicate a small portion of my answer to the "Should we limit party size?", but my main focus will be on the toxicity.
I agree with this. This discussion really is more about party size than team size, but of course one cannot prevent players on a discord call or even through group chats from joining the same maps unless the team size is changed as well. Ultimately the situation is that the team size needs to be reduced BECAUSE of party size.
If those things are happening, may I redirect you to https://cbecrft.net/playersafety? Because these things should not be discussed in a thread, but told to Admins so they can actually do something about it immediately. This is in most countries not allowed and can get you arrested. That's why I think you are in the wrong place if you are discussing this.
I would agree that using resources available is probably preferred, but again, this does not mean that the community cannot do better. Moreover, how would one go about changing the community for the better if not addressing the community itself (especially when those who defend or at least bystand this behavior are within the ranks).
Generalizations of Parties
I probably have not been fair in some of my characterizations due to my negative experiences, and for that I'm sorry. I want to be clear now. It is not the entire parties that are at fault. Rather, I suspect that SINGLE INDIVIDUAL BAD ACTORS (who have influence in their parties or group circles) have abused the party system to get away with these things.
I get the feeling that all "parties" from "those at the top" are being generalised as parties that toxify the community. This is a bold statement and going too far in my opinion. Most parties are quite nice to other players in my experience and if someone is like: "how did you do that" or "can you teach me" and there is in fact a spot free, most parties from "those at the top" will invite that player and try to teach them. However, this can not be done most of the time, communication is an important issue and the willingness to be taught. There are a lot of amateurs who think they know better or do not understand what you are telling them.
What I'm trying to say here is that you are generalising parties too much and putting them all in one box, however, we are talking about the parties that are toxic here so let's move on to that part.
I will not claim that even 20% of the 'top players' act like this, but I'm nearly sure that anyone who parties with those players will be bystanders to it, or even brush off the toxicity or deflect as 'HE STARTED IT,' or 'HE WHO THROWS THE FIRST STONE RECEIVES THE FIRST BOULDER.'
This is a serious problem and I understand plus share your thoughts on this one. I am completely aware that there are lb players who go too far in the jokes and that it is becoming toxic behaviour. This should not be tolerated and is in fact, already punishable. Feel free to report such behaviour using https://reports.cubecraft.net to report them, you may report them using one of the following offenses: Swearing/Bullying, Trolling/Camping/Griefing or Chat trolling.
What I also want to emphasise is the fact that toxicity doesn't necessarily have to do with TD or parties. Toxicity exists in every game, even outside of CubeCraft Games and CCG is definitely not one of the more toxic places to play games.
I don't believe toxicity has anything to do TD or CCG specifically, but I am merely claiming that the grouping of players who are overly idolizing of each other for purpose of social recognition (attention), or effective strategies (easy wins) or otherwise are likely to prioritize those goals over any amount of moral responsibility (teenagers behaving). We could point to top Esports communities that have blatant examples of sexual abuse / misconduct and are highly sexist, but that helps our community how?
Solving toxicity with limiting party size is also not an effective solution, if I were a toxic player I'd be toxic with 6 player as well as with 2 player parties. I don't see the difference.
You can say that, but on the aggregate (i.e. large samples across thousands) if there is a link between grouping and abuse, would we be interested in finding it if it could prevent that abuse? This response presents a hypothetical individual case of 'toxicity will exist no matter what.' This response doesn't sound like someone who wants to find it. And of course it would be disappointing to find it, but if it can help grow the community by removing bad experiences (again on the aggregate), then we should look for those opportunities.
Who is behind the toxicity of TD?
I really don't want to begin the drama here, but it seems you don't have many reservations in naming Heavenly55 as a toxic player.
Also, in my experience and hearing from others, I must bring to attention that heavenly55 is also pretty toxic. Multiple people have experienced and seen toxic chat behaviour coming from heavenly55. That's why I'm heavily surprised that they themselves started the subject. Could you explain your previous toxic behaviour and why you are against it right now?
I wonder who told you this information, because I have never experienced any toxicity on her behalf. I have played many games where she has intentionally done long games to help new players (really 'nooby' players) learn how to play (and even taking losses to do so). I believe you may need to question your sources of this information, as I also know that a simple discord mention of 'heavenly55 is toxic' is likely to go a long way, when it shouldn't.
We discussed the "Limitation of Party Sizes" in a private Discord and came to the conclusion that this was not an effective solution for whatever problem it solves.
But then we look to the 'discussion' happening on discord and see responses like 'it will happen in any game,' 'just get better yourself or make a team,' and 'the discussion already came to an ending.' Clearly those responding here don't have any vested interest in seriously contesting the integrity of the party system (or team size system). Already here we have had a multi-response thread going at least 5 times as long as that 'discussion.' Each of these arguments (which it should also be made clear Shotgun allows as 'fair' and 'good points' in discord) can be addressed:
'it will happen in any game' - I responded to this above but for summary I will respond again here. Suppose it happens in almost every game, but when it happens in every game it has potential to cause drama (again, not the victim, but the perpetrator triggers this drama) and reduce the integrity of that game. We can be lazy and say that it's inevitable, or we can try to address the actual arguments and concerns in order to at least alleviate the problem.
'just get better yourself or make a team' -It is clear that 'just getting better' actually means 'make a team,' since we all know that there is more power in numbers. I have won many 1v6s against new players, and I do enjoy the challenge. I have won 1v3s or 1v4s against 'decent players' who needlessly berate my team and I. But I do not expect to win a 1v6 against 'decent players' or even a 1v4 against 'top players.' This can be summed up as TEAMS > SKILL. So I suppose for new players going ultimately as 1+1+1+1+1+1 v. 6 (decent players) will never win, and this is the point that needs to be addressed. Compare it to an amateur being paired against a GM in chess. They will never win, they won't understand how they lost, and they will be discouraged from playing until the community regulars consists only of the 'better players' who only stay there because their parties disguise their individual experience, skill, or lack of care for the community.
'the discussion already came to an ending' - This is an obvious rebuttal. Just look at this post, and Shotguns post, and everything that everyone else here is saying. More is being said and discussed here than ever has or will be discussed through the discord. If the discussion on discord is over, then I suppose there is no purpose in going there. I hope that if Shotgun and others do indeed want to 'discuss' these issues, that you will be more critical and skeptical of the information you are receiving. I believe it really is for the utmost benefit to all in the community to simply 'think more about it'.
Shotgun, I have to say here that despite the heated issues and disagreements I bring up, I appreciate you taking the time to respond more thoughtfully and completely to these posts. You clearly have influence in the discord and amongst the ranks of 'top players,' and I am hopeful that you can see what I am trying to accomplish with these discussions. I really would be interested to hear more of everyone's thoughts that are not just one liners. Frankly, I doubt I would get it in discord.
I think that way too. Forums work better for this kind of discussions. Let's keep it here.
If you experience heavenly55 as a nice person I think we all have just started off on the wrong foot. I think if we all start over and forgive each other for everything, heavenly55 and the other professional TD players can get along pretty well.
I will answer the rest tomorrow. I do see what you are trying to accomplish by the way, but I do not see how yet. I still don't think limiting either team size or party size is gonna solve the problem.
For now, I really want to thank you for the time you invest in the community. I'm doing and planning to do the same. All of your posts until now are appreciated and (at least by me) well thought about.
Just.... thank you<3
I didn't mean to say it isn't our problem, of course it's ours and it should be solved. I just wanted to say that if you experience any of these situations then a Player Safety report can do a lot more than discussion for that specific situation. Anyways, I do agree it's our problem and it should be solved. Though I do not see an effective solution yet...
I'm still not accepting that you specifically target "rankers" as the ones that are mainly toxic. Maybe the majority of toxic people appear to be ranked but this doesn't mean non-rankers aren't.
I will not claim that even 20% of the 'top players' act like this, but I'm nearly sure that anyone who parties with those players will be bystanders to it, or even brush off the toxicity or deflect as 'HE STARTED IT,' or 'HE WHO THROWS THE FIRST STONE RECEIVES THE FIRST BOULDER.'
I understand what you are saying here and fully agree. Though what should the bystanders do? Report, say something about it? Reporting always seems to do so little with that much toxicity. And what if you say something about it? If that toxic player would listen and you are gone they would just start again...
You can say that, but on the aggregate (i.e. large samples across thousands) if there is a link between grouping and abuse, would we be interested in finding it if it could prevent that abuse? This response presents a hypothetical individual case of 'toxicity will exist no matter what.' This response doesn't sound like someone who wants to find it. And of course it would be disappointing to find it, but if it can help grow the community by removing bad experiences (again on the aggregate), then we should look for those opportunities.
These are all fair points and we should look for opportunities indeed. I'm sorry if I let it sound that way that I don't want to solve this, I really do. However, are there effective opportunities, which ways are there to solve this? I still don't see the limiting of team/party size as an effective solution for the problem.
I wonder who told you this information, because I have never experienced any toxicity on her behalf. I have played many games where she has intentionally done long games to help new players (really 'nooby' players) learn how to play (and even taking losses to do so). I believe you may need to question your sources of this information, as I also know that a simple discord mention of 'heavenly55 is toxic' is likely to go a long way, when it shouldn't.
No, I indeed do not have reservations in naming her, because it isn't just a Discord message like "Heavenly55 is toxic" and it all went bigger and bigger without reason. There are specific situations (I was in one as well) in which heavenly55 was seen being toxic (this does not mean I believe she is a toxic player or that she in fact is. She could still be pretty nice, everyone has their moments, me included). However, it could be that people get more toxic because others react toxic to them as well. The video you showed is a great example: someone made a slightly toxic comment and the party reacted to that. This happens and is referred to as the effect of the Rose of Leary. Though this effect can be broken, what if you make a (non-toxic) joke out of the toxic comment or just react with "thanks!"?
But then we look to the 'discussion' happening on discord and see responses like 'it will happen in any game,' 'just get better yourself or make a team,' and 'the discussion already came to an ending.' Clearly those responding here don't have any vested interest in seriously contesting the integrity of the party system (or team size system). Already here we have had a multi-response thread going at least 5 times as long as that 'discussion.' Each of these arguments (which it should also be made clear Shotgun allows as 'fair' and 'good points' in discord) can be addressed:
'it will happen in any game' - I responded to this above but for summary I will respond again here. Suppose it happens in almost every game, but when it happens in every game it has potential to cause drama (again, not the victim, but the perpetrator triggers this drama) and reduce the integrity of that game. We can be lazy and say that it's inevitable, or we can try to address the actual arguments and concerns in order to at least alleviate the problem.
'just get better yourself or make a team' -It is clear that 'just getting better' actually means 'make a team,' since we all know that there is more power in numbers. I have won many 1v6s against new players, and I do enjoy the challenge. I have won 1v3s or 1v4s against 'decent players' who needlessly berate my team and I. But I do not expect to win a 1v6 against 'decent players' or even a 1v4 against 'top players.' This can be summed up as TEAMS > SKILL. So I suppose for new players going ultimately as 1+1+1+1+1+1 v. 6 (decent players) will never win, and this is the point that needs to be addressed. Compare it to an amateur being paired against a GM in chess. They will never win, they won't understand how they lost, and they will be discouraged from playing until the community regulars consists only of the 'better players' who only stay there because their parties disguise their individual experience, skill, or lack of care for the community.
Also true (you got good arguments xD), could it help if CubeCraft Games developed a party matchmaking? Like that parties will be joining different teams automatically? Unfortunately we can't make the matchmaking completely seperate because we don't have the player base for that (yet, hopefully).
'the discussion already came to an ending' - This is an obvious rebuttal. Just look at this post, and Shotguns post, and everything that everyone else here is saying. More is being said and discussed here than ever has or will be discussed through the discord. If the discussion on discord is over, then I suppose there is no purpose in going there. I hope that if Shotgun and others do indeed want to 'discuss' these issues, that you will be more critical and skeptical of the information you are receiving. I believe it really is for the utmost benefit to all in the community to simply 'think more about it'.
Fair points, but I can't make more discussion out of it if the Discord community is done talking about it. I can't just come up with the same discussion again and expect them to share different or more opinions. That's why I agree with you that keeping the discussion in here is the best option.
Conclusion (for this message)
I do see your points, I do see why we need to fix this, there are in my opinion two problems: toxicity and unfairness because of parties. Do I see that the right way? If so, I'm not able to come up with solutions for the toxicity problem, unfairness because of parties is an issue that I do see solutions for. Such as party handicaps, matchmaking or coin/troop cap boosting.
Shotgun, I have to say here that despite the heated issues and disagreements I bring up, I appreciate you taking the time to respond more thoughtfully and completely to these posts. You clearly have influence in the discord and amongst the ranks of 'top players,' and I am hopeful that you can see what I am trying to accomplish with these discussions. I really would be interested to hear more of everyone's thoughts that are not just one liners. Frankly, I doubt I would get it in discord.
I also appreciate your interest and willingness to spend time. I also like to think I have some influence, yet it comes with pros & cons.
Also, @CrystalDrop, I'm curious to know your opinion on these matters, I bet you read along and I think your opinion could give some more viewpoints on the subject.
I am glad to see that we have made some ground on the potential issues of parties. I will try to summarize claims so as to be sure we are on the same page, and then maybe I can summarize the points I have against them.
There are problems of toxicity (which includes what I called toxicity and misinformation) due to parties, but we don't have a good solution for them.
I am again reassured that we agree that there is a problem of party toxicity, but some of the statements you make sound like we just can't fix it. To answer some of your questions:
I understand what you are saying here and fully agree. Though what should the bystanders do? Report, say something about it? Reporting always seems to do so little with that much toxicity. And what if you say something about it? If that toxic player would listen and you are gone they would just start again...
Bystanders should report. Bystanders should say something about it. But bystanders should also act out to protect people who are treated unfairly, which involves preventing the toxic player from having influence in their common circles, even or more aptly, ESPECIALLY if they are 'friends.' This could prevent it from happening again.
These are all fair points and we should look for opportunities indeed. I'm sorry if I let it sound that way that I don't want to solve this, I really do. However, are there effective opportunities, which ways are there to solve this? I still don't see the limiting of team/party size as an effective solution for the problem.
Is it not though? Really? It certainly is an inconvenience for many players, and they are used to having party advantage, but if parties really claim to go around splitting up and helping noobs, then they shouldn't feel inconvenienced by a reduction of party size (which, as I emphasized before, is inevitably linked to team size). My point is that if there is a way, WE SHOULD EXPLORE IT.
There are problems of unfairness (or what I called degeneration of gameplay) due to parties, but there perhaps are some solutions to be discussed (you mention handicaps, matchmaking or coin/troop cap boosting)
Here as well, your recognition of this unfairness makes me hopeful that there is a solution, and that it will be explored. I respond to a couple.
Also true (you got good arguments xD), could it help if CubeCraft Games developed a party matchmaking? Like that parties will be joining different teams automatically? Unfortunately we can't make the matchmaking completely seperate because we don't have the player base for that (yet, hopefully).
I don't expect a high-level solution to this problem like matchmaking. I don't believe the TD team needs to invest high amounts of resources into this either. I would almost rather there simply be integrity in the community, and amongst the ranks, and across the board of high-experience players. When the witness games being 'too easy' or 'too toxic' or otherwise, for them to self enforce these behaviors. But this 'simple solution' is unenforceable, so a party 'debuff' or at least large group mitigation is the only immediate and sensible action that has at least some benefits for these problems.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This actually brings me to another point of discussion. I am looking for any possible means of improving gameplay for everyone (and not just ranks or parties) as well as increasing the integrity of the ranking system (i.e. leaderboards). I am not really sure how much players actually care about ranking, number of wins, etc. but In my experience many of them do, and pride themselves for it (or even assemble teams based on ranking). I understand that it is a casual game, but if you're going to have a leaderboard, shouldn't it mean something? Here is another way to attack the problem:
The leaderboard (based on total wins) promotes rushed wins and an unnecessary devaluation of new players, most of which will not have time to compete up into the ranks.
I am not suggesting that the current leaderboard be removed, but that other statistics on players (such as win rate, or even solo, duo, multi-party wins be separated) can more accurately reflect integrity, high-value, or skill. I have been on the leaderboard for a while, but when I haven't had the time to play, I drop off in ranking. Many have surpassed, and many I never will. Moreover, I have played against some exceptional stone rank players who analyze the game, and nearly beat me though I have much more experience, but they are nowhere to be seen on the leaderboard. Perhaps even a time based 'monthly' leaderboards (or something similar) could give new players a chance to compete in the ranks.
Personally I devalue players who think that their rank matters, or that big partied wins make them a 'more skillful player.' I will never party with people like this, and I will never party with more than 2. When it is such players that devalue new players or stone or even experienced players' (such as myself) opinion simply because they are 'not highly ranked' is destructive to new ideas, new meta, and creativity amongst the potential player base of noobs that see are seeing the community for the first time.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Conclusion (for now)
I know others have discussed these things in the past, and I think we'll need another thread for more of this... but a change to leaderboards as well as parties I would believe in the best interest in the less experienced players in the community, and would more highly reflect skill and integrity for the more experienced ones.
First, before I react to anything, I wanna summarise this thread a little. Because this thread started as a "Should we limit team size?", then evolved into "Should we limit party size?" and now I want to react to the "toxicity/bullying/trolling" topic. Every one of those are different topics, I will also dedicate a small portion of my answer to the "Should we limit party size?", but my main focus will be on the toxicity.
Toxicity in TD
Definition of "Toxicity in TD"
(Green parts is considered toxicity as I see it, red could be considered toxicity but I won't discuss that in here because it needs far more attention than just "being discussed")
Let's define "toxicity in TD" first, so we know what we are talking about. In my opinion toxicity includes the following:
Trolling by teaching newbies wrong things such as "Witches are good for EXP" or "Oh no, we can't defend those Giants (which is a little outdated atm)".
Trolling by joining the opponent's team and placing bad towers/stealing coins with Inferno's
If conversations like "how to play" and to answer that "send leach" are happening in global chat between party members, I don't think it can be considered toxicity but should be considered as joking. Because we all know you can't send a tower right?
The things I have never seen and I will not be reacting on (and will not be considered to me as "Toxicity in TD" are these:
If those things are happening, may I redirect you to https://cbecrft.net/playersafety? Because these things should not be discussed in a thread, but told to Admins so they can actually do something about it immediately. This is in most countries not allowed and can get you arrested. That's why I think you are in the wrong place if you are discussing this.
Generalisation of Parties
I get the feeling that all "parties" from "those at the top" are being generalised as parties that toxify the community. This is a bold statement and going too far in my opinion. Most parties are quite nice to other players in my experience and if someone is like: "how did you do that" or "can you teach me" and there is in fact a spot free, most parties from "those at the top" will invite that player and try to teach them. However, this can not be done most of the time, communication is an important issue and the willingness to be taught. There are a lot of amateurs who think they know better or do not understand what you are telling them.
What I'm trying to say here is that you are generalising parties too much and putting them all in one box, however, we are talking about the parties that are toxic here so let's move on to that part.
Toxic parties
This is a serious problem and I understand plus share your thoughts on this one. I am completely aware that there are lb players who go too far in the jokes and that it is becoming toxic behaviour. This should not be tolerated and is in fact, already punishable. Feel free to report such behaviour using https://reports.cubecraft.net to report them, you may report them using one of the following offenses: Swearing/Bullying, Trolling/Camping/Griefing or Chat trolling.
What I also want to emphasise is the fact that toxicity doesn't necessarily have to do with TD or parties. Toxicity exists in every game, even outside of CubeCraft Games and CCG is definitely not one of the more toxic places to play games.
Solving toxicity with limiting party size is also not an effective solution, if I were a toxic player I'd be toxic with 6 player as well as with 2 player parties. I don't see the difference.
Dartz showed a video of a party being toxic too, in that video there was evidence of the toxicity of a party that consisted of multiple of "those at the top(?)". However, in that same video, the team Dartz was in, started the conversation with a provoking and slightly toxic message. Being prejudiced most of the time, "those at the top", can easily feel offended by such messages. If they react in a toxic way back it can only be seen as slightly logical in my opinion.
View attachment 185225
This was said to CrystalDrop (one of the most or imo THE most respected and well known players of "those at the top"), the non-ranker prejudiced her as a toxic player.
Who is behind the toxicity of TD?
I'm curious who you are referring to when talking about the parties which are toxic and actually anyone being toxic in TD. Could you name a few? I don't know if this will help the discussion but if you are willing to address them, then go ahead.
Also, in my experience and hearing from others, I must bring to attention that heavenly55 is also pretty toxic. Multiple people have experienced and seen toxic chat behaviour coming from heavenly55. That's why I'm heavily surprised that they themselves started the subject. Could you explain your previous toxic behaviour and why you are against it right now?
Limiting Party Sizes
We discussed the "Limitation of Party Sizes" in a private Discord and came to the conclusion that this was not an effective solution for whatever problem it solves. View attachment 185224 View attachment 185223
If there's a different problem which limiting party sizes is meant to fix, please explain and I'll make sure to discuss this with multiple people.
I hope this answered most of your concerns, if there's anything more that I can do, let me hear.
I can also make a message about trolling/toxic behaviour and post it in the Discord server in my signature, in the Tower Defence forums and in the newspaper TCCT of CubeCraft. If you are positive that it might help, then please let me know and I'll make this reality.
Have a nice day and don't let games influence your real life too much.
Until now I have been following these threads and honestly didn’t feel the need to get too involved, as I really just want problems to be fixed, and I didn’t realize it would be this difficult. But now, my reputation (though already being tarnished in the TD discord) is on the line, so I feel I have to respond. I have spent more time on this than I wanted to, but honestly the depth of this debate has inspired me.
IMPORTANT: if anyone reading this knows anyone who has experienced similar things to what follows or has experienced it themselves, please feel free to contact me privately, in confidence, and you will have open ears and a judgement-free listener.
Definition of "Toxicity in TD"
Claims have been made to the effect that ‘Heavenly55 is a toxic player’ without reservation. I think that it’s now important to understand really what different kinds of interactions look like, rather than labeling all of them as toxic. To my mind, there are at least three kinds really:
Valid Criticism
Roughly defined as ‘Bringing up valid points as to someone’s faults.’ In my opinion this form of ‘toxicity’ shouldn’t even be labeled as toxic because it should be welcome in most interactions. Examples:
‘You guys don’t have the best defense because of X’ - commenting critically on the other team in order to truly help rather than misinform.
‘You guys try really hard because of X’ - again, critical commentary on the level to which players go just to win.
‘You guys think you are the best, but you’re not because of X’ - You see the pattern here.
In most of these cases, an explanation is given or some evidence of a valid criticism
Is present. This should NOT be conflated with toxicity.
Satire
Roughly defined as ‘Using someone’s arguments, traits or beliefs in exaggeration to ridicule them, usually humorously.’ Again, this really isn’t close to a term of toxicity as it has its own rhetorical or even truth finding elements. Examples:
Perpetrator says ‘gg idiots you lose,’ then proceeds to lose (either because of a turn around or in another game) and the Victim says ‘gg idiots you lose’ back at them.
Perpetrator bullies the Victim as ‘go back to the kitchen,’ and the Victim responds with ‘I won’t, but it makes sense that you need someone to take care of you.’
Perpetrator says ‘imagine being that much of a tryhard,’ and the Victim says ‘imagine not trying hard, but typing about it.’
Satire ultimately uses irony (not literality), humor (not seriousness), and generally
deflects the arguments / attacks back like a mirror. This too should NOT ALWAYS be conflated with toxicity.
Verbal Toxicity
This is what I use to characterize the ‘toxicity’ I talk about and what I believe should be close to the true definition. Roughly defined as ‘Inappropriate, usually unnecessarily negative comments with the sole purpose of offense or harm, often imploring lies to do so.’ This is actually a more mild interpretation, but it captures the idea. Examples:
‘You guys have terrible defense because you suck’ - here the difference from valid criticism should be clear. ‘Because you suck’ is not criticism and is not even close to a falsifiable claim.
Perpetrator 1 says ‘Imagine being that much of a tryhard,’ and the Victim becomes perpetrator 2 by responding with ‘You will never be good at the game.’ This case is a real one, in which I believe both parties were toxic, but rather than assuming that perpetrator 1 was giving criticism, they assumed toxicity and responded as such (as they obviously have no way to prove that Perp 1 will ‘never be good’).
‘Heavenly55 is toxic’ - This is an ironic one, but it should again be clear that without evidence or even explanation and just saying it makes the behavior only toxic and not valid criticism.
‘You guys are the worst players ever’ - Again, because no argument is given.
Another perfect example is given here:
A player called the behavior of ‘leaving games’ to be toxic just because it is without offering up a fuller explanation.
‘This behavior is toxic because I don’t like it / because it makes me lose / because it affects me in a bad way’ - This is probably the most general and common form, and does not help anyone understand what they are doing wrong or why it is.
This is not of course to say that any of these statements can never be backed up,
and so we should always ask ‘why?’ or ‘can you explain?’ but certainly some
statements are too offensive to even give that courtesy.
Summary
Overall, it appears that the categories should be ranked as 1 (Valid Criticism) > 2 (Satire) > 3 (Verbal Toxicity), and that 1 and 2 should sometimes be welcome, but never 3. 1 and 2 generally try to seek a lower truth about behavior, strategies, or motives, and are more generally de-escalatory than number 3. When an interaction moves from 0 (no interaction at all) to 2 or 3, or from 1 to 2, or from 2 to 3, IT IS VITAL TO REMEMBER WHO ESCALATED IT FURTHER. But with these clarifications out of the way, I can proceed to my personal involvement in all of this.
Who is behind the toxicity of TD?
DISCLAIMERS: My memory is not perfect, so I had to double check some of this info with some of those involved. Moreover, what follows are but a couple of examples of my experiences, but I can’t even begin to think of listing them all, nor do I have the time. Lastly, I will remind everyone that Shotgun has had no qualms about calling me out without specific claims, so let the record show that I WAS NOT THE FIRST TO NAME PEOPLE, and as you will see I won’t even name anyone.
It has come to my attention too many times that certain circles of players think that ‘heavenly55 is toxic.’ I honestly do not know how this happened especially since I hadn’t even played against most of them before. But not that the same claims are thrown at me in this thread almost seemingly to distract from the culpability of parties, I will defend myself. Below I will use [R1] for ‘redacted 1’ and similar notation for the rest. I did not reach out to specific people as to whether they want me to incriminate them in these things, and as opposed to those who will willingly throw me and my name under the bus, I would rather let them decide to come forward.
Setting the Stage
Some time last fall I began playing TD again after a ~1 year hiatus. Among relearning the game and trying to chill out and have some good old TD fun, I ran into multiple players with rank (though I didn’t know that they were on the TD leaderboards). In a game with me and one of my friends on the map Demons, at a state where it was just us 2 vs a group of 4 or more players. We began EXP stalling.
ENTER [R1] and [R2] from the other team: they began to berate and verbally attack me and my friend. To my knowledge and my friend’s, I did not reply to begin with and tried not to engage in toxic discussion, but my friend was in fact very willing to exchange on that front. After several exchanges including derogatory statements on both parties (again merely any on my part, more on my friend’s) the exchange escalated to a point of outright sexism and sexually themed statements about me. I could no longer resist in defending myself. I am unsure of the things that I said, and I’m sure they were not nice, but only by means of satire of what they were saying as they were horrendously offensive. Though of course my friend is also culpable, I DID NOT ESCALATE THE TOXICITY, [R1] AND [R2], HOWEVER, DID. I only became aware of the fact that these players were on the leaderboard and were fast tracking for the front page, and didn’t hesitate to flaunt that in my face, though I really didn’t care as I have been disheartened about the integrity of the leaderboard for some time now. It was in fact during this conversation that the statements about ‘go to the kitchen,’ or ‘I bet you two [explicit] alot,’ implying that a female in my position is only beating them because of ‘sexual leverage’ over my friend.
During another game during roughly the same period, I met another such player: ENTER [R3]. They as well had rank but also were on the leaderboard and often played in groups of 4 or more. During our first encounter I was playing alone and noticed that [R3] was telling my team to ‘look at our defense if you need help,’ even though we had no problem with any of the mobs they were sending. It became clear to me that they were trying to get my team to build an unnecessary amount of tnt towers, when blazes were the real threat. Surely enough, they won that game, despite my attempts, as an overabundance of tnt did not help against their multiple waves of blazes / speed. This was the first example of misinformation I began noticing amongst party players, but it was topped off with the statement to the effect ‘I guess we’re just better than you.’ Similarly to the cases of [R1] and [R2], I experienced more games with [R3], in which they tended to call me ‘babe’ despite me telling them not to, continuing to berate me and even noobs on my team and the like.
The Plot Thickens
After perhaps months of this (on and off, as I didn’t play every day) I eventually met [R2] ALONE in a game and had a discussion about the incident with [R1] and [R2] and the behavior that followed. I was surprised to find out that [R2] in fact felt pressure from [R1] to say toxic things to me and my friend on that map of demons. Not only this, but they said that [R3] (!) is a very toxic player, and that most people on the discord who think that they aren’t toxic ‘just haven’t played with [them] yet.’ It seemed after my conversation with [R2], that clarity was beginning to form.
[R2] mainly acted toxic because of the presence of [R1], and that the toxic influence of [R3] likely had the same premises, namely, PARTIES. When I had [R2] alone to talk things out, they were reasonable, but in a crowd, they piled on the toxic waste higher and higher without second thought. Ultimately, I believe [R1] and [R3] are the ones culpable for what has happened, though [R2] was certainly complicit in some of it.
My Impression of the Incidents
I was left at the end of this with only one thing to blame: the party system. I never experienced toxicity that affected me as bad as the toxicity coming to me from players on the leaderboard who masquerade as ‘pros,’ whereas stone rank toxic players should almost be expected to be toxic. The regulars, the role models, and THE ‘TOP’ SHOULD NOT. I am curious to know if anyone who believes they are involved or who witnessed such things would come forward.
Conclusions / Outlook
So what are we left to believe? There seem to be two options:
‘Heavenly55 is toxic and is lying about these players for some (?) kind of personal gain (?)’ - You believe that these things didn’t happen, or that they won’t happen again, or that those responsible don’t need to be held responsible. In this case, you believe we don’t need to take any action.
There is truth to these incidents here and at large in the community, because if it affects me, it is statistically likely to have affected many others, but they are unfortunately unlikely to speak out. In this case, you believe we do need to take action.
Whichever you believe, I hope that in the future you will have qualms about ‘just believing your friends’ and not applying critical thinking to your own deep rooted biases.
Bystanders should report. Bystanders should say something about it. But bystanders should also act out to protect people who are treated unfairly, which involves preventing the toxic player from having influence in their common circles, even or more aptly, ESPECIALLY if they are 'friends.' This could prevent it from happening again.
Is it not though? Really? It certainly is an inconvenience for many players, and they are used to having party advantage, but if parties really claim to go around splitting up and helping noobs, then they shouldn't feel inconvenienced by a reduction of party size (which, as I emphasized before, is inevitably linked to team size). My point is that if there is a way, WE SHOULD EXPLORE IT.
I think it might fix the huge advantage players might have when in a party, but not the toxicity. If you wanna explore this solution go ahead, I'm interested in your findings.
The leaderboard (based on total wins) promotes rushed wins and an unnecessary devaluation of new players, most of which will not have time to compete up into the ranks.
This is quite an interesting viewpoint you are giving.
I do like the idea of having another Leaderboard which needs other things to come out on top like:
- Non-party wins
- Pre-armageddon wins and post-armageddon wins
- Duo party wins
- Winrate
I know others have discussed these things in the past, and I think we'll need another thread for more of this... but a change to leaderboards as well as parties I would believe in the best interest in the less experienced players in the community, and would more highly reflect skill and integrity for the more experienced ones.
Making multiple threads to discuss the topics further with the community, I suggest making threads for the discussions about:
Reworked Leaderboards
Limiting Party Size (because nobody follows this thread anymore, they get discouraged by the length of replies)
Toxicity in TD
Heavenly55
You are mostly giving examples and not directly defending yourself, you don't necessarily have to but it's just something that I realised while reading your reply.
I agree with the examples and explanation you give about toxicity, calling a player "trash" has no worth and is toxicity if you don't give reasons. Even if the player were "trash at the game" I wouldn't find it very nice to actually say that to them even if it were with proper reasoning.
I think what you are also trying to say with your message is that people call you toxic without reason, however, this is not true. This time, people actually have reason, I can't speak for other people but I can give you my own experience when I played against you.
So, why I think you are toxic is a conversation between the party I was in and your party. I don't remember exactly what has been said but it was a toxic conversation for sure. It also had a lot of history so I don't know who the "victims" were at that time (I don't like this way of calling someone a victim btw, if both parties are toxic, or multiple persons are toxic then they all are guilty and not marked as "victims"). However, I know for sure that both parties were chatting in a toxic way.
Also, your defence (at the time) consisted of the easiest way of defending as possible. This existed of placing Archer Bottom Path IV as much and as early as possible to defend everything what ever came your way. And if Skeleton IV's were sent, spamming Artillery II was the solution. In the mean time you saved coins for Blaze V and after you successfully defended all waves and kinds of rushes, your party sent Blaze V, speeded and the game was yours.
I do not see this as skilled gameplay but more as abusing broken mechanics. This is a way of toxifying the community by gameplay. I'm 100% sure about this part too.
And finally, I wanna make sure that I have no reservations at all when calling you out and this is with good reason. I find it pretty weird and don't respect it if people who are "toxic" are starting a discussion about stopping toxicity.
Note: I do not hold any grudge against you, also I'm okay with playing games with you in the future and I'd be more than happy to start over again. If you are really that nice person that doesn't judge, then I'm excited to meet you and play games with you.
The Pros (?):
It sounds like we have made some progress, and that you are agreeing that there are problems of toxicity as well as imbalances due to parties. Moreover, it's good to hear that you are encouraging me to look for solutions. But I implore you and others with influence to do so as well.
[Response to fixing Toxicity] - I'm not trying to say we can't fix it, I'm only trying to make clear that I, myself, have no solutions
[Response to what bystanders can do]Could help at least somewhat, so yes, I agree.
[Response to party size as a source of toxicity]I think it might fix the huge advantage players might have when in a party, but not the toxicity. If you wanna explore this solution go ahead, I'm interested in your findings.
[Response to party 'debuffs'] Many already had this idea but it wasn't yet implemented in the recent update. Might be time to further investigate what it might be able to do.
The Cons:
It is however unnerving that in your response to heavenly55 though, you mention what I can only term 'toxic defense,' and this is disturbingly contradictory to your 'persistence' to find solutions to party imbalance. This is the reason for the (?) above.
Also, your defence (at the time) consisted of the easiest way of defending as possible. This existed of placing Archer Bottom Path IV as much and as early as possible to defend everything what ever came your way. And if Skeleton IV's were sent, spamming Artillery II was the solution. In the mean time you saved coins for Blaze V and after you successfully defended all waves and kinds of rushes, your party sent Blaze V, speeded and the game was yours.
I do not see this as skilled gameplay but more as abusing broken mechanics. This is a way of toxifying the community by gameplay. I'm 100% sure about this part too.
Putting the personal concerns of Heavenly55 and Shotgun aside, is this actually considered toxic?
I myself wouldn't even consider the act of 6-partying and spamming 6 waves of blazes for rushed wins as 'toxic.' I do believe that it degenerates gameplay and does negatively affect the community, but if there is such a thing as 'toxic defense,' then there must be 'toxic offense' as well. You don't seem to be addressing that however.
I always build as many archer path 2 maxed as possible when facing parties, since it's the only thing I can do in a '1v4/5/6.' It's simply good defense, and honestly the only chance of not losing to experienced parties as a solo or even duo player. And do parties never do this? Don't they build archers and defend as well? Isn't it just as bad if they do? Do parties never send blaze 5? Aren't parties a broken mechanic as well? Just some questions to reflect on.
I hope you are willing to clarify these claims of 'defensive toxicity,' as it sounds scarily close to claims like 'whatever people do to prevent parties from winning is toxic.' And this is obviously antithetical to your statements about limiting party power and fixing party imbalances.
New Threads:
I completely agree about the need for more eyes on these issues as well as relocating this discussion. I intend on making a reworked leaderboard thread soon, and perhaps the others in the near future.
Sure thing that I'm looking for solutions, I already gave some ideas, however, if I can't see any solutions after thinking about it, how can I come up with more?...
I would, it is also abusing broken mechanics if you are doing it with 6, however, I must mention that with the precision and speed that most parties we are now talking about do it, it definitely requires skill. This is not the case with the defence I described, a noob only has to learn that:
1. bottom path is better for archer
2. spam artillery II if opponents rush skeletons
And after that they'd be able to draw the game. Only thing they have to do after is getting blaze V.
I hope you are willing to clarify these claims of 'defensive toxicity,' as it sounds scarily close to claims like 'whatever people do to prevent parties from winning is toxic.' And this is obviously antithetical to your statements about limiting party power and fixing party imbalances.
Maybe I forgot to mention, but at the times I noticed that abuse of broken mechanics, I, myself, was playing solo and Heavenly55 was in a party of 2. This seems more likely unfair towards me than her... And if you are then still using those tactics to win a game, I personally can describe that as a kind of toxicity. Making sure that you win using the tactics that require the least skill, while even being there with an advantage (as we both agree that a party has advantages).
New Threads:
I completely agree about the need for more eyes on these issues as well as relocating this discussion. I intend on making a reworked leaderboard thread soon, and perhaps the others in the near future.
Yes they do, some parties do. But in my experience, the parties in which I participate, consisting of 4-6 players, those parties don't abuse defensive broken mechanics. If archer is considered a broken mechanic here (which I think can be considered to be that) then I'd say they use archer but without it (at least before the update) you can't defend blaze at all. And another difference, we don't spam them as early as possible to make sure we, either way, don't lose.
Yes, but it requires more skill the way they do then the defending some other players do. And I really believe that defending that way can be as annoying as getting destroyed by parties (at least there's a challenge in defending parties)
I honestly thought you would retract this statement as it is so completely nonsensical to me. You are dangerously close to saying 'HOW DARE YOU GUYS DEFEND OUR ATTACK?' in a game called Tower DEFENSE.
We'll have to discuss more completely this whole notion of 'offense / defense toxicity' on another thread, but it still appears you are defending parties hardcore here, so long as it's not heavenly55.
Basically, you are saying 'more players = more skill; skill is not toxic' - but YOU are the one defining skill here. We can't just divine 'skill,' from our own personal biases. Should we take Shotgun as the ultimate arbiter of skill? You need to give more of an explanation and reasoning. You say that it is easy to do, but if it's the best thing you can do (or literally the only thing you can do to prevent a loss), calling it toxic rather than acknowledging the skill of that strategy is deflection.
In my experience 'more players = less skill,' since the more players you have to carry you so you needn't try as hard or do as much to win. I have played 'skillful' parties of 2 or 3, and I enjoy those games. The only enjoyment I get out of a 1/2v6 is winning and leaving them confounded. To this effect I would agree with you that a 2v1 is certainly unfair, but mathematically 6v2 is MORE SO. To continue to berate smaller parties and call them 'not skillful' sounds like you would assume that any new players (without rank) and not in parties beating players in a party are likely resorting to 'toxic strategies,' as there is no other way they could have, and 'abused game mechanics' to win.
Since by your logic 'the more skillful players should win,' and have effectively deserved the respect of not being seen as abusing strategies, then why when strategies win against you, do you not consider the possibility that those strategies are just coming from a place of skill?
Common Ground? Lastly, and I really hope we can agree on this, defensive toxicity is secondary to offensive toxicity as the first mitigates quick wins / rushing / party imbalance, but the second pushes for quick wins / rushing / party imbalance. If anything you have replied to me in regards to party imbalance has been legitimate (i.e. not disingenuous), then you should easily be able to admit this.
You are going really fast here and concluding things I did not intend to say. More players doesn't equal more skill, the average players skill of the party is the party's skill. And I thought I said I agreed with you that rushing sending Blaze V was indeed degeneration of the gameplay (I see why it is not exactly toxicity but I meant the same when I said toxicity). Parties break the game by creating an oppertunity that the opponents don't have. The bigger the party is the bigger the difference and the more unlikely it is the opponent wins. (this has nothing to do with skill, we are talking about two teams of the same size here who are all of the same skill level)
However, ofc I don't want parties gone and that doesn't mean I'm hardcore defending that. Though there's enough reason to keep them, what would you say when event are hosted, parties of 12 with lots of skill involved, they play a fair 6v6 game and really, it's the day of your TD career. Such events are AMAZING.
But, in a casual game I don't find it fair that parties of 6 crush newbies. And I admit I have been in those but due to this discussion I will never be in such party again without a feeling of guilt. And I personally dont plan on doing it again. It's even more fun to split your party in two when you join a game to make it even more challenging and competitive. I do this much with my apprentice, whom I teach TD to. It can be pretty fun yk. (unfortunately less with bigger parties)
Lastly, and I really hope we can agree on this, defensive toxicity is secondary to offensive toxicity as the first mitigates quick wins / rushing / party imbalance, but the second pushes for quick wins / rushing / party imbalance. If anything you have replied to me in regards to party imbalance has been legitimate (i.e. not disingenuous), then you should easily be able to admit this
I'm easily able to admit, but you are too much thinking in a perpetrator-victim way. Both things are bad, both things should be solved.
And btw, idc anymore whether you believe me or not, If you don't, go search and try make differences on your own, I'm glad to go our different ways if this discussion has to go this way. Know either way, that I'm not done with this subject and will try to find solutions because these topics, I do care about and who are you that I need to convince?
You are mostly giving examples and not directly defending yourself, you don't necessarily have to but it's just something that I realised while reading your reply.
To respond, I did give some examples to demonstrate toxicity that I have been subjected to. I don’t see the need to “defend” myself against the claims presented, as no specific explanations for my behavior being regarded as "toxic" have been given. Therefore, I do not believe that I have been toxic.
I agree with the examples and explanation you give about toxicity, calling a player "trash" has no worth and is toxicity if you don't give reasons. Even if the player were "trash at the game" I wouldn't find it very nice to actually say that to them even if it were with proper reasoning.
Claims have been made to the effect that ‘Heavenly55 is a toxic player’ without reservation. I think that it’s now important to understand really what different kinds of interactions look like, rather than labeling all of them as toxic. To my mind, there are at least three kinds really:
Valid Criticism
Roughly defined as ‘Bringing up valid points as to someone’s faults.’ In my opinion this form of ‘toxicity’ shouldn’t even be labeled as toxic because it should be welcome in most interactions. Examples:
‘You guys don’t have the best defense because of X’ - commenting critically on the other team in order to truly help rather than misinform.
‘You guys try really hard because of X’ - again, critical commentary on the level to which players go just to win.
‘You guys think you are the best, but you’re not because of X’ - You see the pattern here.
In most of these cases, an explanation is given or some evidence of a valid criticism
Is present. This should NOT be conflated with toxicity.
Satire
Roughly defined as ‘Using someone’s arguments, traits or beliefs in exaggeration to ridicule them, usually humorously.’ Again, this really isn’t close to a term of toxicity as it has its own rhetorical or even truth finding elements. Examples:
Perpetrator says ‘gg idiots you lose,’ then proceeds to lose (either because of a turn around or in another game) and the Victim says ‘gg idiots you lose’ back at them.
Perpetrator bullies the Victim as ‘go back to the kitchen,’ and the Victim responds with ‘I won’t, but it makes sense that you need someone to take care of you.’
Perpetrator says ‘imagine being that much of a tryhard,’ and the Victim says ‘imagine not trying hard, but typing about it.’
Satire ultimately uses irony (not literality), humor (not seriousness), and generally
deflects the arguments / attacks back like a mirror. This too should NOT ALWAYS be conflated with toxicity.
Verbal Toxicity
This is what I use to characterize the ‘toxicity’ I talk about and what I believe should be close to the true definition. Roughly defined as ‘Inappropriate, usually unnecessarily negative comments with the sole purpose of offense or harm, often imploring lies to do so.’ This is actually a more mild interpretation, but it captures the idea. Examples:
‘You guys have terrible defense because you suck’ - here the difference from valid criticism should be clear. ‘Because you suck’ is not criticism and is not even close to a falsifiable claim.
Perpetrator 1 says ‘Imagine being that much of a tryhard,’ and the Victim becomes perpetrator 2 by responding with ‘You will never be good at the game.’ This case is a real one, in which I believe both parties were toxic, but rather than assuming that perpetrator 1 was giving criticism, they assumed toxicity and responded as such (as they obviously have no way to prove that Perp 1 will ‘never be good’).
‘Heavenly55 is toxic’ - This is an ironic one, but it should again be clear that without evidence or even explanation and just saying it makes the behavior only toxic and not valid criticism.
‘You guys are the worst players ever’ - Again, because no argument is given.
Another perfect example is given here:
A player called the behavior of ‘leaving games’ to be toxic just because it is without offering up a fuller explanation.
‘This behavior is toxic because I don’t like it / because it makes me lose / because it affects me in a bad way’ - This is probably the most general and common form, and does not help anyone understand what they are doing wrong or why it is.
This is not of course to say that any of these statements can never be backed up,
and so we should always ask ‘why?’ or ‘can you explain?’ but certainly some
statements are too offensive to even give that courtesy.
Summary
Overall, it appears that the categories should be ranked as 1 (Valid Criticism) > 2 (Satire) > 3 (Verbal Toxicity), and that 1 and 2 should sometimes be welcome, but never 3. 1 and 2 generally try to seek a lower truth about behavior, strategies, or motives, and are more generally de-escalatory than number 3. When an interaction moves from 0 (no interaction at all) to 2 or 3, or from 1 to 2, or from 2 to 3, IT IS VITAL TO REMEMBER WHO ESCALATED IT FURTHER. But with these clarifications out of the way, I can proceed to my personal involvement in all of this.
I am glad that you agree with the definitions and examples above. I agree, it is not nice to call someone "trash" even if an explanation could be given. Every TD player was once "trash", so what's the point, right? I think guidance could be given to these players instead, of course only if they are willing to take it.
I think what you are also trying to say with your message is that people call you toxic without reason, however, this is not true. This time, people actually have reason, I can't speak for other people but I can give you my own experience when I played against you.
So, why I think you are toxic is a conversation between the party I was in and your party. I don't remember exactly what has been said but it was a toxic conversation for sure. It also had a lot of history so I don't know who the "victims" were at that time (I don't like this way of calling someone a victim btw, if both parties are toxic, or multiple persons are toxic then they all are guilty and not marked as "victims"). However, I know for sure that both parties were chatting in a toxic way.
People have misused the word "toxic" in regards to me way too many times. To be frank, I've almost gotten used to it. However, that doesn't mean it's okay to keep misusing that word. If you "don't remember exactly what has been said", how do you know that "it was a toxic conversation for sure?"
I don't understand what you were trying to do with this, but I don't see the point of this statement. I could very well say: "Shotgun was toxic and has done things that could get him banned. I don't remember exactly what he did, but it was against the rules for sure." Of course, this would be an example of satire of your previous statement.
See below for definition of satire:
Satire
Roughly defined as ‘Using someone’s arguments, traits or beliefs in exaggeration to ridicule them, usually humorously.’ Again, this really isn’t close to a term of toxicity as it has its own rhetorical or even truth finding elements. Examples:
Perpetrator says ‘gg idiots you lose,’ then proceeds to lose (either because of a turn around or in another game) and the Victim says ‘gg idiots you lose’ back at them.
Perpetrator bullies the Victim as ‘go back to the kitchen,’ and the Victim responds with ‘I won’t, but it makes sense that you need someone to take care of you.’
Perpetrator says ‘imagine being that much of a tryhard,’ and the Victim says ‘imagine not trying hard, but typing about it.’
Satire ultimately uses irony (not literality), humor (not seriousness), and generally deflects the arguments / attacks back like a mirror. This too should NOT ALWAYS be conflated with toxicity.
In addition, you said that "you know for sure that both parties were chatting in a toxic way." My question is: In a toxic way how? - What was said? What happened? How do you know it was toxic? Can you back up your statements?
This is contradictory to what you had just said. If you agree to my definitions and explanations (like you just said you did), you are displaying "verbal toxicity" by calling people toxic with no explanation whatsoever. This has been done in every scenario that I have been called "toxic."
Some examples when I've been called toxic:
1. Defending an attack - "toxic gameplay"
2. Sending an attack - "toxic gameplay"
3. Beating a party- "toxic gameplay by using 1 and 2"
4. Using satire- by restating what other people said to me
Example:
[R0]: Sends Blaze 5 with party
Me: *Starts to build towers*
[R0]: "Get good, losers."
Me & Friend: *Defend Blaze 5*
Me: "Get good."
[R0]: "Why are you so toxic?"
[R0]: *Types in Discord: "heavenly is so toxic"*
See below for definition and examples of verbal toxicity:
Verbal Toxicity
This is what I use to characterize the ‘toxicity’ I talk about and what I believe should be close to the true definition. Roughly defined as ‘Inappropriate, usually unnecessarily negative comments with the sole purpose of offense or harm, often imploring lies to do so.’ This is actually a more mild interpretation, but it captures the idea. Examples:
‘You guys have terrible defense because you suck’ - here the difference from valid criticism should be clear. ‘Because you suck’ is not criticism and is not even close to a falsifiable claim.
Perpetrator 1 says ‘Imagine being that much of a tryhard,’ and the Victim becomes perpetrator 2 by responding with ‘You will never be good at the game.’ This case is a real one, in which I believe both parties were toxic, but rather than assuming that perpetrator 1 was giving criticism, they assumed toxicity and responded as such (as they obviously have no way to prove that Perp 1 will ‘never be good’).
‘Heavenly55 is toxic’ - This is an ironic one, but it should again be clear that without evidence or even explanation and just saying it makes the behavior only toxic and not valid criticism.
‘You guys are the worst players ever’ - Again, because no argument is given.
Another perfect example is given here:
A player called the behavior of ‘leaving games’ to be toxic just because it is without offering up a fuller explanation.
‘This behavior is toxic because I don’t like it / because it makes me lose / because it affects me in a bad way’ - This is probably the most general and common form, and does not help anyone understand what they are doing wrong or why it is.
This is not of course to say that any of these statements can never be backed up, and so we should always ask ‘why?’ or ‘can you explain?’ but certainly some statements are too offensive to even give that courtesy.
Also, your defence (at the time) consisted of the easiest way of defending as possible.
I admit to having been a noob and not having optimal defense. In fact, I never claimed that I did or that my defense was not "the easiest way of defending as possible." However, I am curious to know what type(s) of defense(s) are not the "easiest way of defending as possible?" Please feel free to share any kind of defense that is not considered "gameplay toxicity."
This existed of placing Archer Bottom Path IV as much and as early as possible to defend everything what ever came your way.
I was unaware that I had to wait some x amount of time to start building towers or defending. Forgive me for being a noob, but when is one supposed to start defending? Is it when the mobs are at my castle?
In regards to defending "everything that came my way", isn't that the point of this game? Do you suggest that I don't defend "everything that [comes] my way" and only defend some things that come my way? Or should I simply not defend anything that comes my way? Does this mean that I should let parties win?
Source: Shotgun's Tower Defence Full Guide
I thought you said that one should "just build Archer Tower Bottom Path Level IV front row and place Ice Towers behind it" to defend against blazes.
And if Skeleton IV's were sent, spamming Artillery II was the solution.
In your guide, you suggest that players should "replace some of [their] Sorcerers with Artillery."
I guess my question to you is: Why are you promoting broken mechanics?
In the mean time you saved coins for Blaze V and after you successfully defended all waves and kinds of rushes, your party sent Blaze V, speeded and the game was yours.
I am confused by this, since it is part of your guide and many top players do this with 4+ people. My party you speak of was made up of a friend and myself. I have never been part of a >2 person party.
Source: Shotgun's Tower Defence Full Guide
I actually learned to send Blaze V from these "skillful" parties you speak highly of. Parties of 6 always used this when going against me solo, or myself and a friend. Was it fair then? Did they not abuse broken mechanics? Why is all the blame reflected on me when parties do this more often that not and they have done it for years?
However, according to your logic, this requires skill and is not toxic, right? In addition, you list out instructions in your guide: "I personally feel like going with IV or V Blazes" and "When sending blazes, speed the back wave first.." I only find these statements hypocritical, as we have seen you implementing this to your guide as well as participating in parties who do this, but then claim that it is a "broken mechanic."
It seems that I am being blamed for beating parties. Again, I understand that losing to less players can be disappointing, but beating parties does not make me "toxic". I have also seen parties place Archer Bottom Path IV early enough to defend my blazes and they also placed Artillery if I sent Skeletons IV. They also tried to defend all waves and kinds of rushes. To top it off, they all sent Blaze V and all sped to my castle (another example of satire-see above for definition)! Are they "toxic" for doing this? No, they simply have an advantage by having more people, and therefore, that match was unbalanced and unfair.
I do not see this as skilled gameplay but more as abusing broken mechanics. This is a way of toxifying the community by gameplay. I'm 100% sure about this part too.
If this is not skilled gameplay, then I guess I have never played against anyone with "skill" and they have only abused the broken mechanics, yourself and parties included.
And finally, I wanna make sure that I have no reservations at all when calling you out and this is with good reason. I find it pretty weird and don't respect it if people who are "toxic" are starting a discussion about stopping toxicity.
Calling me "toxic" does not make me toxic. I am only trying to improve this game for the rest of the community that have also been victims of toxicity from parties. If your preconceived biases will not allow you to understand the reality of the situation, I am very sorry.
Note: I do not hold any grudge against you, also I'm okay with playing games with you in the future and I'd be more than happy to start over again. If you are really that nice person that doesn't judge, then I'm excited to meet you and play games with you.
I do not know what you mean when you say that you would be "more than happy to start over again." If that means forgetting the issues that exist in TD, I object to it. You say that you "do not hold any grudge against [me]." However, you repeatedly label me as "toxic" without a reason. I won’t stand for hypocrisy, gaslighting, doublespeak, and I will defend myself from all of it. However, if there really is no grudge against me, and you want to apologize on behalf of your friends and yourself, then we can move forward, rather than “starting over.”
see the above and no, I cannot backup statements because I forgot what the specific wording used was. However, if I ask the people I was in a party with at that time whether they were being toxic, they wouldn't ask me to back up my statements but admit they were toxic, cuz they were...
I was unaware that I had to wait some x amount of time to start building towers or defending. Forgive me for being a noob, but when is one supposed to start defending? Is it when the mobs are at my castle?
Not necessarily, but I have played multiple games with "defenders", ones that use the same playstyle is you apparently, and they don't defend with placing 30 Archers and a few Ices before even touching other towers. They use towers based on what the opponent send.
When reading to answer the rest of your reply, I noticed that you continiously twisted my words and concluded things that I did not mean to say, everything that have been received this way I will not answer because it's just creating drama.
Btw, when I read the last part, I think it might be good indeed to apologise for some behaviour I showed, I might have been slightly toxic at some parts and things I have said may have been prejudiced by accident, I did never intend to though. I can't apologise for others, they gotta do that themselves.
Also, I started replying to this thread because I thought you guys are trying to get solutions, however, you are more and more focusing on getting apologies out of me and all parties that include lb players. This is not solving problems but creating drama, I will no longer partake in this. If you still want to solve things then I'm all ears.
While this may be true, memories triggered/charged by emotion are even more questionable/ not reliable.
If you don't believe me, feel free to look at the studies: Brandy A. Bessette-Symons concluded that "false memory is the most robust effect of emotion." Source: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28625103/
In addition, Lauren A. Monds also investigates this idea and concludes that "the misinformation findings support the Paradoxical Negative Emotion (PNE) hypothesis that negative stimuli will lead to remembering more accurate details but also greater likelihood of memory distortion." Source: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27710207/
In fact, this has been known since Emily Loftus's memory findings in psychology in the 20th century, later coined as "false memory."
However, since you fail to provide/remember any of these accurate details, perhaps you should question your likelihood of "memory distortion." This is not to say that you are wrong. I am only saying that it is more likely that someone's memory will be distorted due to emotions.
Specifically due to the involvement of my friend who was (I can admit) toxic, it seems that you and your friends misinterpreted / misremembered the level to which I was involved in the ‘toxicity.’ I always refrained from involvement in verbal toxicity (though I often satirize offensive statements from the other team), but he certainly got a rise from the other team. I apologize for his behavior, and though I haven’t played with him recently, I intend on calling him out on this behavior going forward. However, since you fail to provide/remember any of the accurate details of MY involvement (aside from the defense), perhaps you should question your likelihood of "memory distortion." This is not to say that you are wrong. I am only saying that it is more likely that someone's memory can be distorted due to emotions.
see the above and no, I cannot backup statements because I forgot what the specific wording used was. However, if I ask the people I was in a party with at that time whether they were being toxic, they wouldn't ask me to back up my statements but admit they were toxic, cuz they were...
I cannot speak for this party, but I object to anyone calling someone "toxic" without a valid reason. However, if they admit to this themselves, then there might be some truth to it. Again, there continues to be a conflation of valid criticism / satire with toxicity, and until now you have yet to use the more specific language around the gradations of interactions people have.
Not necessarily, but I have played multiple games with "defenders", ones that use the same playstyle is you apparently, and they don't defend with placing 30 Archers and a few Ices before even touching other towers. They use towers based on what the opponent send.
I don't know what other "defenders" do or don't do. If they don't do what I do, then it's clearly not the same play style. I also don't think it's fair to ask someone to not build certain towers or not send certain mobs, when it's a vital part of the game AND especially if these expectations are not held for everyone. Yes, this includes parties.
If for some reason you object to someone defending using "Archers and a few Ices before even touching other towers," then, I believe you should update your guide. Otherwise, you are contradicting yourself, since is the advice that you offer when defending against blazes, a tactic commonly used by parties.
Again, see below.
Source: Shotgun's Tower Defence Full Guide
When reading to answer the rest of your reply, I noticed that you continiously twisted my words and concluded things that I did not mean to say, everything that have been received this way I will not answer because it's just creating drama.
If I did twist your words in anyway, please let me know where/when. I will immediately offer an apology. However, this is uncharacteristic of me, and I believe that I only used direct quotes to address your points.
I am 100% okay with you or anyone changing their mind, since this is in fact human nature, but it is unfair to expect me to assume what you did or did not mean to say, other than what was stated. If you happen to change your mind on anything that you previously stated, please let me know either by responding or reaching out to me privately.
I don't think answering points objectively creates drama. It offers a discussion and an opportunity for improvement/growth.
However, if biased notions are kept, then yes, that can certainly cause unnecessary drama. Please let me know how I can help you address these points, without causing drama.
Points needed to be addressed by Shotgun (or someone on Shotgun's behalf): 1. What are some types of defense that are not considered "toxic" or "gameplay toxicity?"
Also, your defence (at the time) consisted of the easiest way of defending as possible.
I admit to having been a noob and not having optimal defense. In fact, I never claimed that I did or that my defense was not "the easiest way of defending as possible." However, I am curious to know what type(s) of defense(s) are not the "easiest way of defending as possible?" Please feel free to share any kind of defense that is not considered "gameplay toxicity."
2. When should one start building defense and what should they defend?
This existed of placing Archer Bottom Path IV as much and as early as possible to defend everything what ever came your way.
I was unaware that I had to wait some x amount of time to start building towers or defending. Forgive me for being a noob, but when is one supposed to start defending? Is it when the mobs are at my castle?
In regards to defending "everything that came my way", isn't that the point of this game? Do you suggest that I don't defend "everything that [comes] my way" and only defend some things that come my way? Or should I simply not defend anything that comes my way? Does this mean that I should let parties win?
Source: Shotgun's Tower Defence Full Guide
I thought you said that one should "just build Archer Tower Bottom Path Level IV front row and place Ice Towers behind it" to defend against blazes.
3. Are broken mechanics present in your guide? If so, why are you promoting them and then bashing on players that follow them?
And if Skeleton IV's were sent, spamming Artillery II was the solution.
In your guide, you suggest that players should "replace some of [their] Sorcerers with Artillery."
I guess my question to you is: Why are you promoting broken mechanics?
4. Should waves of Blaze 5 never be sent, since they are part of the "broken mechanics?" If so, why have you sent them before (in a party and not), as well as included them in your guide?
In the mean time you saved coins for Blaze V and after you successfully defended all waves and kinds of rushes, your party sent Blaze V, speeded and the game was yours.
I am confused by this, since it is part of your guide and many top players do this with 4+ people. My party you speak of was made up of a friend and myself. I have never been part of a >2 person party.
Source: Shotgun's Tower Defence Full Guide
I actually learned to send Blaze V from these "skillful" parties you speak highly of. Parties of 6 always used this when going against me solo, or myself and a friend. Was it fair then? Did they not abuse broken mechanics? Why is all the blame reflected on me when parties do this more often that not and they have done it for years?
However, according to your logic, this requires skill and is not toxic, right? In addition, you list out instructions in your guide: "I personally feel like going with IV or V Blazes" and "When sending blazes, speed the back wave first.." I only find these statements hypocritical, as we have seen you implementing this to your guide as well as participating in parties who do this, but then claim that it is a "broken mechanic."
It seems that I am being blamed for beating parties. Again, I understand that losing to less players can be disappointing, but beating parties does not make me "toxic". I have also seen parties place Archer Bottom Path IV early enough to defend my blazes and they also placed Artillery if I sent Skeletons IV. They also tried to defend all waves and kinds of rushes. To top it off, they all sent Blaze V and all sped to my castle (another example of satire-see above for definition)! Are they "toxic" for doing this? No, they simply have an advantage by having more people, and therefore, that match was unbalanced and unfair.
5. Are you trying to say that when people use these tactics, they are not "skilled?" If so, does that mean that you, me, all parties, and all people that I have played against that used these tactics are not "skilled?"
I do not see this as skilled gameplay but more as abusing broken mechanics. This is a way of toxifying the community by gameplay. I'm 100% sure about this part too.
If this is not skilled gameplay, then I guess I have never played against anyone with "skill" and they have only abused the broken mechanics, yourself and parties included.
Again, I am not intending to cause drama, and I have no idea why you interpreted it this way. I only want to understand why you see these things as "gameplay toxicity," but also do them and say that it "is a way of toxifying the community by gameplay."
Btw, when I read the last part, I think it might be good indeed to apologise for some behaviour I showed, I might have been slightly toxic at some parts and things I have said may have been prejudiced by accident, I did never intend to though. I can't apologise for others, they gotta do that themselves.
I will definitely accept your apology, and apologize as well, since I am sure that I did not welcome any form of toxicity.
I am not sure if "things [you] said may have been prejudiced by accident," but as long as you did not mean any harm, I am willing to put this behind and move forward. Thank you.
I agree, you should not apologize for other people, and it was unreasonable for me to expect that from you. I'm sorry. However, people should own up to their actions and realize the severity of the unnecessary drama that they are creating/have created. The only reason that I mentioned this was because you contributed to these people's actions. Of course, you are not responsible for their actions, but I only meant to say that you should assume some responsibility of influence, as you already did.
Also, I started replying to this thread because I thought you guys are trying to get solutions, however, you are more and more focusing on getting apologies out of me and all parties that include lb players. This is not solving problems but creating drama, I will no longer partake in this. If you still want to solve things then I'm all ears.
I am not focused "on getting apologies from you nor all parties that include lb players." I only responded to your statement of: "I do not hold any grudge against you, also I'm okay with playing games with you in the future and I'd be more than happy to start over again" by saying that "if there really is no grudge against me, and you want to apologize on behalf of your friends and yourself, then we can move forward, rather than “starting over.”
See below for clarification on the point stated above:
Shotgun: "Note: I do not hold any grudge against you, also I'm okay with playing games with you in the future and I'd be more than happy to start over again. If you are really that nice person that doesn't judge, then I'm excited to meet you and play games with you."
Me: "I do not know what you mean when you say that you would be "more than happy to start over again." If that means forgetting the issues that exist in TD, I object to it. You say that you "do not hold any grudge against [me]." However, you repeatedly label me as "toxic" without a reason. I won’t stand for hypocrisy, gaslighting, doublespeak, and I will defend myself from all of it. However, if there really is no grudge against me, and you want to apologize on behalf of your friends and yourself, then we can move forward, rather than “starting over.”"
I don't see how acknowledging actions that led to negative consequences is "creating drama." We have done this multiple times over the course of history. It can help us prevent us from making the same mistakes that lead to tragedy.
Since the beginning, I have been trying to solve things. However, to first solve "things," we must know what we are solving. This is the only reason I am bringing up these issues, to find ways to fix them.
In your previous post, you attacked me personally by calling me "toxic" way too many times without reason and then proceeded to say that you did not hold a grudge against me. Like I said before, "calling me 'toxic' does not make me 'toxic'," but saying this and then saying you don't hold a grudge against me is antithetical.
I am more than willing to help solve problems, and I would like to do it together, rather than as opposing sides. I don't see you as my 'enemy', and I hope you don't see me as such. If you would like to offer valid/critical criticism for the sake of improvement, then I will welcome that. Unfortunately, just calling me "toxic" does not fall under this category.
I hope that we are able to find common ground and work together for the sake of the TD community.
@dartz42 I know this discussion is kind of over and hopefully you are making those threads we talked about in the future. I just want to let you know one more thing. I understand that the forums has better ways to communicate and I encourage you to keep using the forums. But there is one particular Discord that would make much difference, I know you care about the game and by knowing that you must be willing to also join that particular Discord. You'd then be able to talk to people in a more direct way which allows your suggestions to be pushed through much faster. Of course, it's best to make threads about it as well. This is because then the community would be able to give opinions about it too, but also because we are not the only ones that play TD. The newbies, amateurs and other players have different viewpoints and TD has to be fun for all.
Hopefully you understand this and will consider joining the Discord server. Have a great day!
New predictions based on the news we got this week:
- New Snowman Survival maps are most likely releasing sometime next week
- OG EggWars update is releasing in a couple of weeks according to Cam through Discord (screenshot below).
A couple of weeks is usually 2 weeks but sometimes can be 3 weeks.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
