DeletedUser99588
Still finding it difficult to understand how one guild supplying goods for another guilds fighters to win sectors from a third guild isn't the same. I'm not suggesting to stop it just that it now makes the rule out dated.
-
Dear forum reader,
To actively participate in our forum discussions or to start your own threads, in addition to your game account, you need a forum account. You can REGISTER HERE!
Please ensure a translation into English is provided if your post is not in English and to respect your fellow players when posting.
-
We are looking for you! Always wanted to join our Support or Forum Team? We are looking for enthusiastic moderators!
Take a look at our recruitment page for more information and how you can apply:
DeletedUser
Let me explain to you what you've written here. When I attack and plunder player B, it's OK, it's within the rules. After that my actions are finished, I don't do anything more. But when neighbor A puts 10 FP into my GB (the action I have absolutely no control of), I, according to your interpretation, become guilty and can be banned. You keep me responsible for actions of other players!
Dear mods, I appreciate everything you do for the game, but you really should put more thoughts into the game rules. You said it by yourself, that there are no definite rules, it's all about mod's judgement. At the same time, as this example illustrates, you feel that it's OK to punish a player for actions of others. Would you want judges like you to judge your case in a real court? It's not just about this situation, it's also about push accounts, multi-world trades, and so on. There are vaguely formulated rules, everything is up to mods, and the response for every request for clarification is like "We won't tell you the exact rules, because in that case you'll know them and won't break them" (my favorite argument!).
DeletedUser104815
It's Disappointing to see there are some guilds that still like to Ghost sectors. Time to name and shame
World - East-N
Main Guild - The Unforgiven
Ghost Guild - Weekend Warriors
Main Culprit - Chuck (Unforgiven Guild Member)
Don't care what you say, after Simply attacked Unforgiven in CA - Weekend Warriors took all CE sectors from Simply and then released them again to neighbouring guilds. That's ghosting guys! Thought we had moved on from there.
DD
World - East-N
Main Guild - The Unforgiven
Ghost Guild - Weekend Warriors
Main Culprit - Chuck (Unforgiven Guild Member)
Don't care what you say, after Simply attacked Unforgiven in CA - Weekend Warriors took all CE sectors from Simply and then released them again to neighbouring guilds. That's ghosting guys! Thought we had moved on from there.
DD
DeletedUser2989
Actually if a ban was to go through I'm pretty sure it'd include the person paying as well. You aren't being punished because someone else gave you goods but because your actions were motivated by them (thus being banned due to your own actions). However in the case you gave I also had the following to say:
To add to that it'd also be hard to prove that it was definitely a payment when messages asking or offering are not present (this lack of evidence probably works in your favor). I can't say what decision a CCM/CM would make when presented with such a case (it really depends on the exact details) but given enough doubt around the actions taken it's more likely that a ban would not occur. Though the easy way to avoid this grey area and risking a ban is just to be as kind to those that you help as they are to you
The difficulty that we are experiencing with applying the same rule to the GvG situation is that your dealing with multi person entities (legal ones that is
) and the fact that your not attacking players as much as attacking sectors (which in themselves are a shared resource which didn't exist before).A lot of this has actually drifted off the topic of ghosts which I apologize for. It will be interesting though if upcoming rule changes (if any are made) can make an impact on ghosting, still waiting to see actual game changes to at least deter their use...
DeletedUser
Hard to believe, but it gets better and better
It's wrong to punish an innocent player, but if someone else is punished as well, that's fine.
This sub-thread went too far off-topic, so let's stop here.
This, of course, changes everything
It's wrong to punish an innocent player, but if someone else is punished as well, that's fine.Please make up your own mind. My actions in this example - attacking a player on behalf of 3rd person, without being offered, demanding, expecting, or voluntary accepting any payment. This action should be either legal or illegal, without reference to what the 3rd person does afterwards. Your previous post and the game rules state that it is legal; now your are saying that it is prohibited.
This sub-thread went too far off-topic, so let's stop here.
DeletedUser12146
If you can't solve ghosting (which dev's probably never will), you can at least make a MINOR modification:
When you attack sector, your attack army is deleted from your army management.
And if you have no army in this era, you simple cannot attack.
It just doesn't make sense, that you can use same army to attack over and over and over again.
It should be identical as goods. When you attack, you loose goods...
When you attack sector, your attack army is deleted from your army management.
And if you have no army in this era, you simple cannot attack.
It just doesn't make sense, that you can use same army to attack over and over and over again.
It should be identical as goods. When you attack, you loose goods...
DeletedUser108218
But AA have never done anything like that have they...lol
DeletedUser96869
I agree that ghosting should be done with and most guilds have stuck to it in East-Nagach.....However, when a guild is using a bot to siege (which is far more disappointing) I can understand players resorting to other under hand tactics to gain any advantage where they can. That being said, I will not be ghosting until any AA player does.
DeletedUser96745
what bot?
DeletedUser97059
NomadRob: do you have any details about which bot might be used? I suspect that Hanseatic League in Houndsmoor is also using bot to siege. It is impossible to be faster than them, even when using high end hardware and internet connection over optical fibers.
DeletedUser12400
We'll take that as a compliment.
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser99438
DeletedUser96745
If you take accusation of cheating as compliment as being forum moderator, something is really wrong with this community.
DeletedUser12146
Come on, people are just too slow on putting in def. It is all about speed, no bot needed for that.
If we attack a sector, no way any1 will put in def, since I re-siege so quickly. Only frozen game can change that....
DeletedUser12400
We put our hearts and souls into this guild. We teach to our members every aspect of the game which includes practising fast sieging in gvg province map.
DeletedUser97425
I see a good thing in this...FU will actually find a "bot" if there is something like that and they will be the ones cheating.
If they compare us with some kind of sieging machine, that is definitely a compliment
If they compare us with some kind of sieging machine, that is definitely a compliment