The politics in this game world are not nebulous they are insane. I hope we can at least all agree on that!
I just want to say that I have played a lot of games but I have never seen the kind of - players making up the rules game as this in my life!!!!!!
I know there are a lot of mistakes and this game is still in the developmental stages, which is why I suspect so many players feel they can make up their own rules. But the rules are pretty clear in this game. For dueling there is a built in limit on the range of the players that can be dueled by other players. That is all. There is nothing about the moral value of hitting one player over another. If that was an intended aspect of the game, there would be some sort of system to accompany it - perhaps lower points for hitting builders and higher points for hitting fighters... whatever! This is not an accident!
The rules are clear and complex enough to indicate that the game developers knew what they were doing when they set it up. You have to belong to a town. Your town has to have a mortician if you would like to duel, but you can still be dueled even if your town does not have a mortician. You cannot duel the same player more than once an hour. Nothing about who you can duel... but there are limitations on the level disparity. Nothing else about the frequency of dueling. Sounds very purposeful to me.
If someone joins your town, it is not dishonorable if they read your forum. The forum is there for them to read. That is part of the game. You can't kick a player out for 24 hours after they join. That is intentional too. There are hidden forums you can use. You don't have to invite people into your town - there are many options for everyone.
All of these rules create situations for game play, strategy, and intrigue. That is what is supposed to make the game interesting. It allows different people to manipulate the available opportunities in various ways to create new game plays. Every player is faced with choices and opportunities. It's all good. There is no moral value attached to any of these things.
One strategy is to ban together with other players to create giant alliances that are based on player defined rules. Then that alliance has the challenge to enforce the rules they are creating. That is good strategic game play. That is not morally superior or inferior. It is just a game play.
Another way to play the game is to duel/sleep the giant alliance until they are all ready to do a lemming dash into the sea... That is not morally superior or inferior either. It is also good strategic game play.
The only problem on world 8 is the moral/honor smog that chokes everyone and makes it so no one can talk about good game strategy or appreciate the cleverness of other players. Name calling is lame - sorry but it is a sign that the people involved don't know what they're really talking about.
If you wish to argue any of what I have written here, then first address these same issues regarding an old established game. No one questions the rules, and people who play spend a lot of time mastering those rules so they can manipulate the game play for strategy and challenge. Did you ever hear a chess player say that it is not honorable for a queen to take a pawn? Of course not... and if you're a good enough player you might be able to make your pawn become the queen.
