Cheating

[rjs66]

this is a strategy game - the aim of which is to develop a better strategy than your opponents
the game allows people to make alliances between guilds and encourages people to form guilds to work as a teams

how can it possibly be unfair ?

calling it unfair when some people are better at strategy than others is purely delusional, or the sort of behavior you would expect from a small child when it can't get it's own way

everybody starts the game with exactly the same chance and resources as everybody else, calling people cheats and the game or people's tactics unfair because you have made the wrong choices is totally ridiculous

you say that we dominate the AF map , we worked hard as a team to produce the resources need to compete effectively in GvG

you resent having to provide goods or troops to support GvG , and just want to gain points for yourself
working as a team we gain lots of point battling in GvG , our guild power increases as a result, the whole guild benefits from the increased guild level
we work hard to produce the resources we need to be effective, such as goods, troops etc..for GvG

your city on EN5 has no HoFs , or other guild power producing buildings, no GBs that produce any resource for the guild (except a low level observatory)
when you were in MA you resented supplying goods, defense troops or anything else to support the guild in GvG

you then complain that you can't compete with bigger guilds when you aren't prepared to do anything to support the guild you're in

you haven't struck a nerve at all , we are merely trying to point out that complaining about a guild getting nowhere whilst members are doing nothing to support the guild is at best laughable
and claiming that inno must in some way punish the active players / guilds for playing the game and being successful is ludicrous

 

[Vesiger]

I think the point he's trying to defend is that it's unfair in principle to create what is in effect a 160-member guild in order to circumvent the game restrictions, which seems an issue worth discussion, even if the specific guilds used as an example here are adamant that this is not the case where they are concerned.

 

[rjs66]

we are not a single guild either in principle or in practice, we are separate guilds supporting each other - we are allies
the management of each guild is separate and is free to make whatever decisions they wish

we are not circumventing any game restriction, nor are we trying to

there is nothing wrong with making allies , any guild can do this , and many do

what his issue seems to be is that some allies work better together than others
so instead of actually doing something like trying to make his guild work well as a team and make allies etc.., he whines about how unfair it is that those who do make an effort and are successful should be punished in some way

what you get out of this game is directly proportional to what you put in
put the effort in and develop a strategy that works

if your view is that being allies is unfair then you should empty your friends list too , as they are not part of your guild (generally) yet they help you and you help them, and don't aid or trade with anyone in your neighborhood either, as that might seem like some sort of collaboration

 

[DeletedUser110131]

I think the point he's trying to defend is that it's unfair in principle to create what is in effect a 160-member guild in order to circumvent the game restrictions, which seems an issue worth discussion, even if the specific guilds used as an example here are adamant that this is not the case where they are concerned.

That's a very generous interpretation, but does you more credit than ChevyDiesel, I think. Possibly, there may be some small element of a principled and rational view in his position. However, with the obviously envious, spiteful, and personal nature of his attack on named guilds and players, it's hard to believe that rational and objective debate of a principle is his main concern. If it is, he certainly picked the clumsiest possible way to go about it, derailing the discussion before it started.

On that principle, though: The line between "in effect a 160 member guild" and "two guilds, cooperating very closely" is virtually impossible to draw. There's no way for one guild to enforce it's dominance over the other guild. There's no way for the leaders of one guild to forcefully interfere with the administration of the other guild. The only mechanisms for one guild to dominate, or for one leadership to control two guilds, or for the leadership in two guilds to function as one, are political and diplomatic. Examples are sense of loyalty, respect of agreements, common interests, mutual benefits, friendship, shared history, and other factors that we find in real world international politics and diplomacy. Even if two guilds share a common origin, this will still be the case, as is the case between real world nations. The USA, Canada, and Great Britain are different countries today, even if they all once were simply the British Empire, even if they remain close allies, and even if one of them is distinctly more dominant than the others. Since the game is supposed to reflect such things as empire building, diplomacy, war, and trade, it's reasonable that it allows a great amount of politics and diplomacy. Two guilds cooperating, however closely, isn't overwhelming, by the way. It should be entirely possible for other guilds to do the same.

Of course, none of that means that there should be no limits at all. Perhaps some more limits on cooperation will improve the game, perhaps it won't. What's certain beyond doubt is that cooperating as closely as the rules will allow is neither cheating or unfair. It's simply the best strategy, and will remain the best strategy, even if the rules change. Attacking guilds for cooperating is, quite simply, irrelevant to any discussion about modifying the rules. Attacking a guild leadership for being too good at advancing the guild is... Well, shall we say absurd, and leave it at that.

By the way, Inno: The auto-censoring of my last post for the "aitch oh em oh" of "**** sapiens", that's a brilliant example of why censorship makes the world less intelligent, day by day. Humanity is turning into that simple-minded teenager going "Huh-huh! You said yur-ainous", when the teacher lists the planets. Yeah, I self-censored that, in case the correct spelling would've been mauled by the auto-censor. *sigh*

 

[DeletedUser103849]

As difficult as it may seem and as impossible you may think for one person able to have control over more than one guild is very limited thinking. There was a ship one time said to be unsinkable we all know how that turned out. Probably doesn't happen in any other world of FoE and might never be duplicated again however, it's possible and it's happening in E Nagach. In fact, if FoE has the ability to track the founder/leader movements and messages over the past several years would be very revealing. Don't get me wrong it's a remarkable achievement and I don't think anyone will ever be able to duplicate it. When you have sister guilds strategically positioned to protect the motherland with maybe 240 + at your command while other guilds are limited to 80 members with unreliable alliances made up with passive players you are truly mighty. They track mandatory minimum weekly goods donations, if you fail to meet the requirement you will be shipped off to one of the sister guilds. How many guilds do you know have that ability, able to weed out the less aggressive players but still valuable for whatever reason and send them over to the sister guild, yet we are led to believe total independence. It's a masterful way of counting cards to achieve a high level of dominance in a silly game that pays nothing in the way of financial reward. Really unbelievable!

 

[DeletedUser110131]

@ChevyDiesel
I realize that this level of cooperation seems like magic to you. It really isn't, though. It also isn't cheating.

Guilds with high ambitions and guilds with lower ambitions, allying with each other and exchanging members, is simply a rational strategy. For various reasons, players will occasionally want to change their activity level. When they reduce their activity, they don't want to be a burden to a very ambitious guild, while, at the same time, they don't want to abandon old friends entirely, and also want to join a guild they know something about. Joining an allied guild is the obvious solution. When they want to increase their activity, wanting to join a more ambitious guild makes sense, and for that guild to be allied with their old guild also makes sense.

I realize that these guys are very good at what they do. However, being good isn't a form of cheating. They can be so much better than you, as to make people believe there are several steps between you on the evolutionary ladder, and it still won't be cheating. They can be that much better than anyone and everyone, and it still won't be cheating.

The only thing keeping you and others from matching them, is effort and ability.

 

[DeletedUser99616]

Chevy are you still crying????
What u on about man, checking our messages lol, are you for real?
Stop crying and go whine to someone who cares.
End of the day we have more enemies than we do allies, so I'll give you a clue.... go plan a coordinated attack on us and try knock us off our perch.
Unbelievable Jeff! x

 

[DeletedUser103849]

You guys can't have much of a life between map watching, meeting spreadsheet quotas, and responding instantly to forum messages...sad! I don't want to knock you off your perch I just want to see how long you would stay on the perch on a level playing field.

 

[rjs66]

teamwork - a group of people doing a little each to achieve a lot

look in the guild forums - in the admin for the forums it allows guilds to share the forums between multiple guilds, Inno obviously like the idea of working together as a team

level playing field - everybody starts with exactly the same resources and at the same level, what you do from there makes a difference
the only way the field may not be level is the dead-weight making bits of it sink

guild needs resources to fight GvG , these do not magically appear, those who don't contribute are dead-weight, why support them ?

map watching - get enough people logging on at different times and spend 1 minute checking maps and it doesn't take individuals very long,
alert your own guild and allies as required, get points defending sieges against your allies
guilds can be run by different leaders and still work together, plans and strategies can be discussed, they don't get dictated
no one can force a player or guild to do anything they don't want to

setting up a spreadsheet make take a bit of initial effort, but doesn't take long to update (read logs, type into spreadsheet), see at a glance which members are helping and which are just leeching resources for themselves

move members into guilds that suit their playing styles, where they will find the game more enjoyable

overall a lot gets done, but it's done as a lot of little contributions by many players

on the other hand , me me me i i i , contribute nothing and try to do it all yourself is not going to make for a good guild

so don't complain if you don't play the team game and thus don't get the benefits of teamwork

for some unfortunately teamwork is an alien concept , so they just complain that they can't compete instead

 

[DeletedUser110179]

@ChevyDiesel
I realize that this level of cooperation seems like magic to you. It really isn't, though.
It also isn't cheating.

Cheating is too big a word. Is the teamwork and co-operation beneficial ?

Extreme teamwork eventually derails itself ... everything in moderation. The Roman and British empires faded into obscurity because they tried to do too much good. One-man operations like Alexander the Great and Attila the Hun also faded when they overreached themselves. Royalty fell from grace when common people were excluded from education. Raw capitalism lost ground in favour of some socialism to support the elderly, sick or jobless young.

Teamwork and exclusion does work but the beneficiaries may be very few. Organised crime like Al Capone and the mafia were very efficient but illegal (and stamped out). Teamwork is a fine line between corruption and fair play. Monopolies can easily turn into instruments of personal self interest.

The end justifies the means (even if they are cheating in [m]any way). ♫

 

[DeletedUser653]

Hey FoE have you noticed how I struck a nerve and behold who responds nothing to see here to my allegation, Ice & rj (MA peas in a pod). I wonder why 99 % of the other guilds in E Nagach are not defending your position Ice. You would think if you were playing fair & square they all would run to your defense and blow my allegation out of the water.

#The only nerve you have struck is in my ears from all the crying you are doing.
The rules state 96 hours before a player can return from another guild. If you really think the problem is players hopping from guild to guild then put forward a "idea" to increase 96 hours to 128.
But please please stop bleating on like a child about 2 guilds working together and think about doing the same if you want to challenge them. No guild can climb to #1 without working with other guilds and if you do not understand this you do not understand FOE

 

[DeletedUser108379]

.... I just want to see how long you would stay on the perch on a level playing field.

What I do not understand is why you think that GvG is not a level playing field.

Yes, there are two guilds working together. That helps them. They are successful than your guild. But why is the playing field now not fair? You could do the same? Yes, they found a way to success earlier than you. But is this unfair?

If the cooperation of two guilds would be made impossible (how?), than you will see the next difference between those guilds and your guild (if I read the other entries right), in the other guillds there would be more members to donate goods and troops. Will you than claim that this is unfair?

If you always declare unfair what makes another guild more successful than your guild, you will have to eliminate every competitive aspect out of the play. And GvG ist meant to be competitive.

Btw, two guilds (or even more) working together is happening very often in my experience, either open or behind the scenes. That is part of GvG.

 

[DeletedUser653]

Chevy
In EN1 AoF is fighting 5 guilds working together, including 3 (maybe 4?) previous #1 guilds. Is this unfair? Of course not. Those 5 guilds (CA/NWO/Boots/Creepy/IW) have banded together to hit us and we have the exact same option to band with other guilds so its very fair indeed.
If i posted how unfair this was I would be totally wrong and I would accept fully anyone accusing me of being a cry baby without the knowledge to play the game.....