Quote:
Originally Posted by Assassin
What about if an alliance gets over another 40+ people say who dont usally play the game or have previously played and no longer take part, signup, build one ship in mass, remain outside of tag and then of course defend them 24/7 allowing the players inside of the tag (the real players) to use their fleets more effictively to grow then to keep having to defend other members of the allie (as these flak planets are doing it) You would see that as fair?
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Light
The only time the support planet rule should be enforced is if a planet has signed up with only intention of playing for another player. Weither through allow themselves to be roided, farmed for ships, or crashing on them for salvage.
|
Or, let's say, simply build up a few hundred roids, a bunch of refineries, and consistently donate resources to an alliance/community with no intent of doing anything else over the round. Does it have to be 40+? Are Section the only ones actually punished by this rule? How about 10+ dedicated donators/out of tag defenders?
One could argue, that, building a ship and defending 24/7 is more of an effort to actually play the game than building a planet, and logging in once a week to donate all the resources available to a fund of an alliance. The support planet rule is well too vague and has always been enforced from very subjective and often arguably biased views. It allows the multihunters an excessive amount of interpretation, personal preference, and thus preferential treatment.
One multihunter might say that only building ships to escort/defend with counts as support planets. The next round, the second multihunter might say that also setting up resource donation planets counts as support too. The round after neither might. Then, on the fourth round, a different (or even the same) multihunter could decide that crashing for salvage is also supporting and against the rules. Unpredictable, not very transparent, and very much too focused on the hair day of the rules enforcement.
Claiming bias in multihunter activity isn't anything new and has to do with the no-negotiation no-disclosure terms. High profile people get treaten very different, according to their reputations. If a multihunter "knows you", he might simply slap closure on your planet for "false sign up details" or a reason so so. There is no "player treaten as player", but there is "this evil guy treaten as this evil guy", and "this good guy treaten as this good guy". The support planet rule is a testimony to this. And the fact that it was originally implemented mid-round is a further nail to the case.