SUBTERFUGE Forums

Negative medals are possibly the worst idea that the developers could ever have implemented into this game. Devs, please reconsider the implementation...

I am all for positive reinforcement medals, but the negative medals open up a possibility of trolling and sore losers to really ruin someone's reputation out of spite.

I was given a "toxic" medal by a player I had literally only said "Hello" to, only because of an alliance I had formed in the game against him that won the game. Completely unfair and ridiculous!

Also not being able to break alliances or face being publicly branded as a traitor is ridiculous and damages the diplomacy possibilities of this game forever.

Negative medals also open the possibilities of being forced into deals by paying customers, IE: "Cancel that attack or I will medal you Toxic and Traitor". COMPLETELY game breaking and unfair.

Please remove these from the game, they have absolutely no place, and ruin the game from my point of view.

I would certainly advocate increasing the cost of negative medals to be much more expensive than positive ones, to stop people using them in petty situations

rosslessness wrote:I would certainly advocate increasing the cost of negative medals to be much more expensive than positive ones, to stop people using them in petty situations

Yeah, this I agree with. Make it $5, or maybe as much as $10. This'll either make it only used in extreme situations, or it'll make the devs lots of money. Either way, it's good

I also like the idea of increasing the cost of negative medals.

I personally don't think negative medals should EVER be a thing, no matter the cost. It just can be abused too much.

Having only positive medals is good enough. Seeing a player with many games and no medals would give you pause. But you'd never be 100% sure, unlike the negative medals.

Make more categories of positive medals, but keep them positive!!

I came to this forum to say exactly this. The first persons deserving a turd medal on their profile are the developers themselves for coming up with such an immature idea (sounds like I'm insulting them? I'm not, they are the one who allowed this possibility, so if they think anyone can judge anyone in such a way, I can judge them too). I don't have one but it's only a matter of time considering how often the players I betray take it badly and think I deserve a slow death for that, even though betrayal is the name of the game. The turd medal will quickly become synonymous of traitor and soon you'll get a game called Subterfuge where you can't pull any subterfuge whatsoever because someone defecated on your profile and no one will trust you.
It's like the yellow-branded passport of Jean Valjean, not even a chance for redemption.

The whole idea behind the metals is pretty strange...

I dont want to make assumptions but the medal system seems to be the same as the neptunes pride version. There the toxic medal is ten times the cost of others, and is a less puerile icon. It.should be noted that the first player in np to recieve such a badge was the games creator...

I believe the idea originated from Neptune's Pride 2: Triton, which included bad medals as well as good ones.
Perhaps the devs thought that since it worked on another game, it will work here?
I agree that negative medals to rarely any good, and will most likely cause isolation to the player who received them.
I would advocate for a removal of those medals.

I fully second that
I personally would not give any Toxic medal to even the worst backstabber
1) Subterfuge is the name of the game and you can not punish people for playing that way
2) as in rl, there are all kinds of people and you have the means to spot them (from the way they chat, their record etc...)
so:
1) no Toxic medals
2) or price increase
3) or as a last solution Toxic medals to players with 5 other medals (except Patreon)