Scurvy Scroungers/Talk Archive

From The Urban Dead Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search

Do you zerg?

This post is to address the above question. I suspect the answer is "yes", but I'd like to present my case here and give you a chance to defend yourself.

Scurvy Scoungers named "zerg"

The following accounts were all created on 2009-01-03.

Furthermore, you've listed CapZerg as an important member of the Scurvy Scroungers. If so, is he also responsible for the following accounts or are they separate players?

There are other scroungers with the last name "zerg" which I have not listed. I understand that some groups like to choose similar naming conventions to show unity but perhaps you can see why this draws suspicion, particularly with the accounts created on 2009-01-03.

ScS Response

Response: The scroungers recruited irl a number of people on the day in question. I was not personally present when they all joined up but I am told they decided on the Zerg name gimick. Some of them indeed did zerg, but this was investigated by administration, and those accounts were removed, I think the number was 3 accounts, the remaining scroungers were all different people. --Ebineezer Shifton 17:20, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Confusion among the ranks?

On your newly created wiki page you've listed Maron Deldibon as an important member of the Scurvy Scroungers. I have witnessed Maron attacking in turn, within a minute of a Scrounger attack so I believe this claim to be true. However Maron's group affiliation is actually Urban Paladin, not Scurvy Scrounger. I can understand the confusion, if you are managing multiple accounts.

Response: The confusion was simply a matter of some players not switching their tag. It's that simple. Maron was the leader of the Urban Paladins who were a survivor group who switched sides after consistently being pked. Simply forgot to switch his tag. --Ebineezer Shifton 17:07, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Lack of a wiki or forum

This wiki page was created today, Jan 27th, 2009. For quite a long time the Scroungers consisted of 10 players. But within the last few weeks your numbers have shot up to 21. This seems unusual since during that time you had no wiki page or forum to recruit with. Furthermore, Scurvy Scrounger graffiti in New Arkham is non-existant.

My question to you is - "How does a zombie group with no means of in-game communication, no wiki presence, no allies, and no advertising go from 10 to 21 members in a matter of weeks?"

My explanation is quite simple. There is no need for a forum or an in-game recruitment drive if to bolster your numbers you simply create more accounts. This is my argument. I have been biased in my argument so that it would stand on its own. However I will objectively listen to your response and I hope that the zerging, if it exists, is the result of a rogue member and not your policy as a group.

--Giles Sednik 00:45, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

ScS response part 2

Response: Indeed the scroungers did not have a wiki until recently because we are a group of IRL friends, and until survivor activity stepped up, did not need to recruit in game. The 12 or 13 of us were creating a nice niche in NA with occasional raids into other zones and didn't see the need for a wiki. Furthermore, we recruited through out of game methods largely because it is impossible, or nearly so, for zombies to effectively recruit in game. We had attempted spraypainting when reved a number of times, but that proved to just get covered over almost immediately. Our surge in membership was a result of adding aditional IRL friends to the game as well as gaining membership from other games some of our members play, such as MUDs. Additionally some of our members hadn't added the Scrounger's tag due to some internal confusion and did so following a roster check durring the middle of January. As I mentioned earlier, and perhaps to satisfy your hopes Giles, the zerging being done was carried out by a couple of new recruits (we recruited something like 8 people durring a IRL party we had). A couple of them proceeded to zerg, were punished by the administration, and told to leave the Scroungers. It is not a group policy, and was an restricted to one or two individuals. Were actually curious about the sudden surge of activity on the part of the South West Alliance. Until late dec 08, early jan 09 there was little to no resistance in this area when all of the sudden the number of survivors seemed to tripple overnight. Were pretty sure you just begged for outside help, and banded together due to our unimaginably successfull strategies, but since your going to throw acusations at us how bout you answer for yourselves? --Ebineezer Shifton 17:14, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

SWA response

Thank you for your reply Ebineezer. I appreciate your candor and your desire to handle the zerging that occurred in your group when it came to your attention. Your explanation seems adequate to me and I believe you when you say that the zerging activity was the result of a rogue player or two and not your policy as a group. My personal feeling is that it was more widespread than 3 names but I am willing to accept your response at face value.

I recall the times when your group numbered in the 12 - 14 range and the damage you were able to inflict on Foulkes Village with that small cadre. I've long suspected that your core group was honest and intelligent, separate from the blatant zerging that took place, and I'm glad to find out that you will remain intact as a healthy opponent. And if you chose to move elsewhere I wish you luck in your endeavors. Myself and the SWA are not opposed to players being zombies and in fact a number of us maintain zombie alts and enjoy the sweet pleasure of barhah.

As far as the surge in survivor numbers in New Arkham, I've written an article on our New Arkham activities that very clearly outlines what happened. The SWA isn't trying to take full credit for the turn-around in NA but we did play a part. The article recognizes the efforts of the local survivors and other groups who joined the fray. There is room in the article for you to leave your own account of events, from your perspective. And to directly address your question - no, we don't zerg, and I don't think we do anything that even resembles zerging. I hope to see the Scroungers again in battle, and I hope that we can both engage each other through the time-honored tradition of civility. Thanks again for your response. Long live Urban Dead!
--Giles Sednik CAPDSWA 21:39, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Really?

Are you honestly going to tell us that guate6 3 and guate6 4 are two different players, one in your group and one not, both holding down the Mitchener Building as standing zombies? With the same player name and description in their profiles? Really? ScroungerZerg.PNG Apparently you haven't removed all the players in your roster who actively zerg. And since your leadership is standing there right with them, it seems you don't really discourage it all that much. ~ extropymine Talk | NW | 4Corners 21:10, 26 February 2009 (UTC)


And it seems that just a couple nights ago I ran into a D Death, D Deathluigi, and D deathstroke, or something like that. How fun. And yes, both of those belong to the same Raul, one he used as a human and one he used as a zombie, but then too many survivor groups started using tactics that are questionable (that I'm not interested in debating as they have already had both sides addressed in this same talk page), and so I guess he brought his human down to offer support. But since you guys don't like the current odds of our 15 to your 100, I'll go ahead and tell him to send his human away and back to being a human. That way it's back to a fair fight.--Gerald Studabaker 04:27, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

You should not send him away because I "don't like the current odds." No, you should send him away because you have said explicitly that you do not zerg and do not condone zerging, yet here is a member of your group, zerging. Don't "spin" this-- he's providing a zombie body in a ruined NT so it cannot be repaired, just like his Scrounger character. That is absolutely, positively zerging, and trying to make it sound like anything else is just foolish. You're not going to have any ground to stand on if you keep this up, and eventually everyone is just going to write off your group as cheaters. That is why you should send him away, instead of excusing him. ~ extropymine Talk | NW | 4Corners 05:03, 27 February 2009 (UTC)


Hrm... I don't really care too much to get bogged down in a ,imo pointless, flame war here, but since the ScS leadership is being directly addressed and accused of turning a blind eye to this rather obvious zerg attempt (at least to a survivor armed with a DNA scanner) in Mitch, I felt it might be worth dropping a comment. I try to keep all current members on my contacts list, but obviously as a zombie I have no means of identifying another random zombie unless said zombie takes an identifying action in that square (such as groaning or killing someone). I can't DNA scan a zombie like survivors can so I have no way of tracking zombies. As far as I know, the accounts that were alt abusing have been banned and are no longer active. The other Zerg named characters that have chosen to remain in the area have been asked to remove their group tag and not associate with the ScS. I was unaware of guate's other accounts and have asked that he also move his alt out of the region. As Giles of CAPD mentioned elsewhere on this talk page, terror tactics have often been used on other groups (such as using a group tag and then going on PK spree to dirty up the group's reputation) so I wouldn't be too suprised if some of these zergers were just trying to ruin our rep. We've been operating in this area for quite some time and I find it odd that right around the time when survivor resistance and cordination picked up, the accusations of ScS zerging have been pretty constant along with a lot of unfamiliar ScS tagged accounts popping up all over the place. Thanks to Extropymine for pointing out the account name issue, the situation should be resolved shortly. However, I would encourage you to keep as sharp of a lookout on your own fellow survivors in the area and not solely focus your efforts constantly on the few zombies in the area, as I have several reports from ScS members about similiar multi-named survivors of new level in the area as well. --Mogwick 05:12, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Heads up

Controll = wrong. Control = right. --Pestolence(talk) 01:09, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

You caught a typo. Thanks? --Ebineezer Shifton 17:09, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Giles...something's definitely amiss with this crew.

Glad to see it wasn't just me imaginging things and I wouldn't hold my breath awaiting an honest reply from anyone in that crew. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Stockcs1 (talk • contribs) at an unknown time.

Response: Our lack of response to this was because we were unaware that this page even existed. It certainly was never mentioned to us in game, and as I have noted elsewhere, we didn't use, and were unfamiliar with the wiki until recently. --Ebineezer Shifton 17:36, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Highly organized?

LOL!, I guess its easy to launched highly organized attacks when they are controlled by only a few people. You went from 10-30 members almost overnight, no longstanding,highly advertised, well known groups have posted those kind of numbers which leaves only a single conclusion. Your group and others who engage in this kind of play are a bane to this game and the principle of fairplay. You destroy the balance that is achieved by the 50 AP limit...blah blah blah, you already know all of this and probably don't care, if you did you wouldn't be doing it in the first place. Disgusting.--Legion 19:07, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

ScS response

Response: The Scroungers are indeed highly organized. Over the course of about a year a group of around 10 people demolished the groups in this corner. We communicate through message boards hosted elsewhere, and coordinate our strikes as well as zombies can. We noticed that it was groups not normally located in this zone who did the leg work in outing our group from the Mitchener, it is at that point that we began in game recruiting. To further adress this comment I would propose that it is actually childish tactics and behaviour like those employed by your groups that are actually the bane to this game. The Scroungers have constently had people hurling insults at us, taging buildings with insults, and other such acts, simply because we play the opposite alignment in a game. Show some maturity. On the flip side of things, the Scroungers simply keep quiet, and launch coordinated, and effective attacks. The singleminded determination to eliminate all resistance that you have shown, while perhaps a natural part of the game, is actually what destroys the balance. Take a look at the map, clearly their is no balance. Zombies are horribly out matched. Your behavior suggests you have self esteem issues. Please seek professional help. --Ebineezer Shifton 17:32, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

While were on the subject of your guys' behavior lets talk about some of the cheap tactics you employ. This is right off your forums, and is a post from Giles. Heres the link to the page itself http://z15.invisionfree.com/UDSouthWest/index.php?showtopic=160

" Well after moving up to the Care bank to rest I was PKed in a what appears to be a coordinated assault between a few of the rotters and a PKer named Pirim. I would actually say that this is a major tactical breakthrough in our efforts to retake the NT building. The rotters who were stationed there have now left the building and are APed out in my current position. This should mean that the building is ungaurded. by at least Sheik and Gothmogg.

We don't have to worry about the PKer for now because he can't stop us from barricading and powering the building. I'm going to check on the Mitchener in zombie form now and we'll see what the situation is.

- Balthcazar and Ebineezer Shifton are inside the Mitchener now. They're both rotters. There is a revifying corspe here as well. I'm going to stand here overnight and build up some AP. If anyone runs into me go ahead and pass along a revive, otherwise I'll start on the two rotters with my hands and teeth in the morning.

We can take this thing in the next couple of days.

Oh yeh, I changed my group affiliation to Scurvy Scroungeres so I can track them with the scent death. Here's my profile so there's no confusion http://www.urbandead.com/profile.cgi?id=1092512 "

Wow, that is a really lame and cheap move Giles. No surprise though, I've seen you do it in the past, but having your own admission just makes it that much lamer. Wouldn't surprise me if some of you had made zombies and added the Scroungers tag just to follow our movements and have drones for newbs in your groups to xp off of. --Ebineezer Shifton 19:48, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Giles Response

I would like to quickly address some of your concerns. Firstly, I think it is wrong to hurl insults at players just for playing as zombies/PKers etc. If survivors have been taging buildings with insulting or abusive language towards you I apologize for that and I think it's wrong. I'm totally against that and I've written an article on civility to try and address this kind of behavior, specifically among survivors. I hope that people will listen to me and begin to treat their opponents with a little respect. I agree it damages game balance and it damages the experience of the game. So, a totally valid point on your part.

As far as my in-game tactics, I respect that you disagree with how I play. However, I don't think any of the tactics I've ever employed are cheap or lame. So I have nothing to hide there and I don't mind "admitting" to using scent death. I'm a proponent of using all of the tools within the game at your disposal - combat revives, revive point clogging, group tags, X:00, GKing, etc. Actually the only things I find objectionable are zerging, abusiveness, and forum spying. I will never infiltrate your forums to gain a competitive advantage, even if you have done this to us. And again, I can promise you I've never made any zombie drones/zerg accounts and I know that no one in the SWA has ever mentioned doing this. If they did, I would remind them that this is cheating. --Giles Sednik CAPDSWA 21:57, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

I think you should have the last word since this is your page, so you can consider this my parting response unless you specifically request that I contribute more to the discussion. But I do want to explain my use of Scent Death and changing my group tag because it has bothered you so.
I appreciate that different players play by different codes, but I think you should know that Scent Death has long been recognized as one of 3 zombie skills useful for survivors. Actually, it's VERY useful. The Scenteral Intelligence Map is a recent effort to use scent death to the benefit of survivors. Also, group tags have long been recognized for their strategic value. X:00 for example. As a member of a survivor group, I'm accustomed to seeing players carrying our tag and PKing people to stir up trouble. It's just part of the game.
Again, you're welcome to your opinions but you should understand how they fit within the context of the community playing urban dead. I hope you can see why this isn't an issue for me. From my perspective I was just making good use of my skills. Tactics which are annoying, disruptive, or disagreeable, but are nevertheless honest and valid, are not considered unfair - Coalition for Fair Tactics. All the best to you.

--Giles Sednik CAPDSWA 08:09, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Gerald's Response

Well to be fair, humans have a massively easier time communicating, and zombies are at a complete disadvantage when it comes to communication and organization. So what zombies DON'T need are humans changing team tags so that we can be individually hunted or located. To me that seems no different than viewing another group's forum for one's own advantage. Humans have countless more advantages as it is, first and foremost with the number of active users. And things like rotter reviving in a ruined building seems like abuse of a game mechanical oversight. It removes one of the only meager advantages a zombie has. I personally don't bother perusing your forums, as it is bad form, but I believe it to be equally bad form to change your tag to ours.

In fact, it should probably be changed so you flat out can't use someone's team tag without that team's permission. But that is neither here nor there.

Man, how long has this talk page been around, anyway? We just found it out a few days ago. --Gerald Studabaker 06:51, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Legions Response

Your funny ebineezer, A zerg group that accuses others of zerging seems to the classic response these days. Congratulations on your IRL recruiting drive. Since it was the only possible yet unprovable response you could give I salute you, getting people to play urban dead is difficult, daily limits, no graphics, ect... yet you got over a dozen people in one day, nice. And not only that these people with varying degrees and backgrounds are able to attack in unison every single day without fail, your lucky to have such dedicated people in your group, the logistics alone are amazing. You know what is really hard though? Pulling off something like Operation Vitamin C! Coordination between 4-5 different groups, with different schedules,and different abilities that are actually controlled by different people.

I find it hilarious that you are bashing giles about using low tactics to gather in-game information yet you admit to being a forum spy at the same time. Do you see the problem? Personally I think your lying...about everything. Why allow members to use zerg in their name knowing the implications, its not a gimmick, you just didn't care at the time because you were unopposed in the area. My guess is that you have between 5-10 people actually active controlling small clusters of zeds.

Why don't you provide a link to your forums, I would love to stop in and say hello to your members in your public area of the forums.--Legion 19:13, 23 February 2009 (UTC)


Gerald's Response

Well the reason it is so easy for us to coordinate is because 75% of us all live in the same town and grew up together. And everyone in our group is reachable through our actual phones, so when a strike is needed, it's usually known a couple hours ahead of time via texting. And yes, scheduling is sometimes a problem, but more often than not, we can make very coordinated strikes because we are all friends first, not just strangers who enjoy the same game.

And good lord, how in the world could anyone have 5-10 characters that they run? You only get so much AP per day, and what with having a character in Monroeville that uses the same amount, I don't see how it's possible. Maybe if you shelled out $5 a character, but I haven't spent a dime on this game. You know, because it's a free online game.--Gerald Studabaker 06:56, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Ebineezer's rejoinder

Yeah getting people to play urban dead is difficult, but our friends have joined up, and as I mentioned earlier alot of them play MUD's which are non graphical text based games so they are used to that sort of thing.. Not all of them play every day either, so we spend alot of time with only about 10 of us active and doing suff against 10 times the number. We use forums to communicate, as well as other methods, like the telephone. You talk about coordination between 4-5 different groups of completely different people, but I seriously doubt that you have no zergers among your ranks. As for accusing you of zerging, I am merely reporting a fact about the sudden, overnight influx of survivors into the SW. Maybe it is legit maybe it isn't. I am willing to accept the idea that you somehow managed to coordinate that sort of assault. Yet you can't accept the idea that we added a few new members to the group. You can call me a liar all you want, but you have no proof of it, so until you get some, you can shove it.

I don't see a problem with forum spying. If you are idiot enough to post sensitive information on a forum which isn't part of the game and which everyone can see, that seems like your own fault. Were not giving away a link to our forums anytime soon, so you can just forget about that. What I do see a problem is using abusing an in game feature designed to help zombies coordinate their efforts so you can gain a tactical advantage. If we could control who added our tag, you would never be able to do that. You, on the other hand, could lock out your forums.

As far as the success of Op C, I wouldn't be slaping eachother on the butt about it too much. Consider this; its quite easy to kick 17 zombies asses when you have x10 survivors in the zone. Quite another to coordinate successfull assaults on various strongholds when your in the opposite position. I did a little scouting the other day and found no less then 3 survivors in every single building in NA. The fact that we ever inflict any damage is a testimate to how well we are organized. I certainly remember a time not too long ago where 8 or 9 of us ruined Henley repeatedly and sent CAPD running. Your just pissed that it took this massive of an effort on your part to handle a significantly smaller group. Deal with it. --Ebineezer Shifton 06:02, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

A quick reply

Bigger fish than zergs to fry--Athur birling 23:39, 24 February 2009 (UTC)


Eh zerging matters. I wouldn't like it if Giles showed up and then Giles 1, Giles 2, Giles 3, etc all started barging in. While I'm sure plenty of humans and zombies alike run multiple accounts (see: all those dozens and dozens of level 1 humans that just stand guard in buildings and nothing else), it is still a rule for a reason. As it stands, it doesn't seem to be helping either side to gain much of an advantage, but if it is ruining the fun of the game for people then it needs to be weeded out.

People who complain about a small zombie group that barely manages to dent them, for example, ruin a lot of the fun of the game. ^_^--Gerald Studabaker 04:36, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Condition in the SW corner

It is interesting to look at the suburb pages. Lots of survivor groups, but only 1 or 2 two zombie groups. This sad state of affairs is ruining the game. --Ebineezer Shifton 17:57, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

It ebbs and flows. Back in 2006, the Southwest was the perennial wasteland. What's really doing it is the mega-hordes. Such a concentration of zombies rolls through an area, then survivors revive the fallen and it's green until the next mega-horde rolls through. My personal view is that every survivor in Malton should also run at LEAST one zombie, to keep things interesting for other survivors. It also makes them better survivors, to see the other side of the fence. - Uncle Elbert 21:13, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. The mega-hordes devistate any balance. When its just a couple groups duking it out you can get some really cool wars raging. Everyone looks for the upperhand though and brings in more to the fight. If zombies could more easily maintain a defense against survivor groups maybe the hordes wouldn't roam so much, but it doesn't look like any changes are going to happen any time soon to create that sort of scenario, so until then I guess it is what it is. --Ebineezer Shifton 06:02, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

The Great Suburb Group Massacre, 2009

Check-Mark-Reviewed.jpg Group Confirmed.
This group was confirmed active. Thank you for your reply.


Occasionally, general checks are done of group activity. This may seem like a stupid question, but it's for all groups, regardless of size. -- User:The Rooster RoosterDragon User talk:The Rooster 15:03, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

The Scroungers are active. --Ebineezer Shifton 17:33, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! --Pedentic 17:33, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

The Great Suburb Group Massacre '10.

Stop hand.png Group Inactive?
No reply has been recieved as to whether this group is still active. The 14 days have passed and as such the groups link has been removed from suburb listings. If the group is again active please feel free to revert these changes

Thanks --Michalesonbadge.pngTCAPD(╯°□°)╯ ┻━┻ 23:01, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

We're sorry to see the lack of a response. If you guys are still active, feel free to add yourselves back to the listings for the suburbs. —Aichon— 19:12, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://wiki.urbandead.com//index.php?title=Scurvy_Scroungers/Talk_Archive&oldid=2064898"