the NEW exeption system!

[wakey]

Originally Posted by xontas

/me gives up trying to ask people to just respond to the limits and not to the system :/

settings will be anounced shortly
and they will be set untill 1 week after pt 72
after that we will look @ any changes we want to make

Give us a decent spread of limits and you will get responces. After all the limits your giving us to choose from are basiclaly just a small range of values that you want and our views simply dont matter because it doesnt really matter which as they are largly the same.

Oh and on the issue of the system being unable to be changed and enhanced. For an idea thats clearly had no thought put into it by PATeam because theres some glaring problems that could have been sorted easiely without removing the system its fairly ridiculous that you didnt reveal any details about it sonner when enhancements could have been made.

[kamikaze69]

ok xontas, you wanna see a fresh new face with a genuine opinion of the system??? Try this on for size.

With the discussion of the removal of the pre-launch system, I forsee that there will be people in alliances made up ONLY from one timezone, and if it gets a thumbs up, I forsee alliance of schools, small businesses and local gaming groups that will complain about your proposed system because they will ALL need to apply for an exemption (the proper naming convention for all your qwerty ppl) and if so much as 1 person forgets their entire alliance is DELETED!!!

In my opinion that is BS. Hows that for an opinion???

[kamikaze69]

oh btw, there are 153 posts by my count now, and 42 of them are yours xontas, so you can't really say that it's the same ppl over and over again.....1 in every 3 posts.....that's not a thread, that's a chat room.

[xontas]

we are gonna stop discussing it now
thanks for your input
anouncement on the final settings will be up before R14 starts

[Heartless]

Well, I wanted to tear apart your argumentation xontas, but after reading todays posts from your side, I feel it is senseless to do so, as it won't change anything, which is extremely sad.

It is frustrating to see PA Team isn't learning from history. The system does more harm than good.

When I remember how I got introduced to PA, it was by someone from my school and short after me almost half of the class started to play as well. And, for the top of it, we thought "hey, cool, let us do a galaxy together". That was round 4, and we had a lot of fun in the beginning (... but then again the game was much more fun than it is nowadays anyways). We went to someone's place in the evening and drank some beers and chit-chatted a lot and everyone checked his account and did stuff everything; sometimes even from one of the few pubs with i-net access back then. That was one huge fun factor of this game. Tell me, how do you want to give players this kind of experience now? How do you want the community to introduce new people into the game? With applying for an exception that limits us to not defend each other and to not attack with each other and thus frustrates the freshly introduced people as well as their mentors?

[xontas]

again, time will tell

[wakey]

Seeing as Jammyjim logged off just after closing this thread so cant explain why its been closed and seeing as I'm reopening it. The thread contains a valid discussion on the failings of the exception system and seeing as this discussion would just start up on a whole new thread theres simply no need for it to be closed. If anyone has any complaints about that they can come to me directly

[Heartless]

Well, I use the chance and try to be constructive again then.

Ok, the system will be in the game.

1) Go and adjust it in a way that scans do not count as interaction if they were performed by all interacting planets, as that does exclude the chance of being a scan planet. I.e. if person a and b have an exception, and a scans planet X and b does the same it is obvious that a is not a scanner for b and vice versa.

2) Set the interaction limit very high. One week after protection the game isn't running at it's fastest pace, eta's are still pretty high and due to high eta's attack intervalls are still very long. You can still tighten the limit after investigating a few logs.

3) Tell us players how we should introduce new people into the game since your marketing department seems to be miserably failing at this point and we are pretty much limited due to the exception system and it's hard coded closures.

[wakey]

Originally Posted by Heartless

3) Tell us players how we should introduce new people into the game since your marketing department seems to be miserably failing at this point and we are pretty much limited due to the exception system and it's hard coded closures.

its not a hard coded closure, it just prevents you doing any more interactions after you use them all up. So as I highlighted earlier if you scan a couple of galaxies your fellow ip member has and use your quota up you will then not be able to scan a galaxy that attacks you if the other person has scanned them in the last 24 hours

[Heartless]

Originally Posted by wakey

its not a hard coded closure, it just prevents you doing any more interactions after you use them all up. So as I highlighted earlier if you scan a couple of galaxies your fellow ip member has and use your quota up you will then not be able to scan a galaxy that attacks you if the other person has scanned them in the last 24 hours

Ok, my bad. The outcome is still pretty much the same, if not even worse (with being closed your fleets are instantly returned which may prevent you from getting roids - with not being able to scan your attacker you are likely to lose roids and maybe even lots of ships).

[god113]

I like the way that in the topic 'NEW' is in capital letters. It almost gets me excited about it.

[Judge]

I dont know about anyone else but this has been like bashing my head off a brick wall.

We are presented with a set of options which are really not that different from each other, the limits suggested are basically rubbish.

Being unable to scan a target (especially one that is attacking you) just because it happens to be in the same galaxy as your flat-mate/work-buddy/friend/lover etc is clearly a stupid restriction under any circumstances.

Xontas had already made the desision arbitarily so why did he bother to ask us at all ?

The only reason I can suggest is that he wanted to piss everyone off pre-round just for the hell of it.

[Ramihyn]

I think the base idea is a bit flawed. I can understand that trying to improve your game against cheaters leads to such simple solutions and it probably is tempting to implement them if you dont know a better way BUT any self respecting and half decent cheater knows at least since RD 4 that using the same IP to control multiple planets is a big mistake.

It became clear long long ago that comparing IP adresses is THE main thing beeing looked after and therefore any cheater i knew obviously would make sure to use one IP each planet.

Thats really really trivial and old news for many rounds and to implement a system which is based on IPs just makes me smile mildly and shake my head but certainly wouldnt worry me as a cheater if i still played.

The same goes about finding those simple repeating patterns like they are created when you farm a planet. Thats why already in RD 7 or so a much "better" system of farming was used which doesnt create patterns and withstands any manual evaluation of a MH.

So from a cheaters perspective - your hunt for multiple planets beeing used from the same IP just makes me think you arent up to date with cheaters and that you will only (as happened in old rounds) find really stupid (newbie) cheaters by that and it wouldnt worry me the least.

But from the response of several players on the forums, i guess its valid to say that they think the problems outweight the benefits and from a players perspective i can understand them.

Somewhere in this thread you (xontas) said something like "if you behave the same like a multi, then you are asking to be closed" (in reference to flatmates or classes playing in the same gal with the same IP). Well a cheaters goal is exactly the opposite - a decent multi tries to behave exactly like multiple players and avoiding the same IP is the very first most simple basic thing to do.

You are just barking up the wrong tree with this automated mechanisms to find multis and the ones sitting on it are just players and probably a few most stupid wannabe-multis ever.

And now i go back to continue work on my new gaming bot system - dont worry, not anymore for PA

[xontas]

Originally Posted by Judge

I dont know about anyone else but this has been like bashing my head off a brick wall.

We are presented with a set of options which are really not that different from each other, the limits suggested are basically rubbish.

Being unable to scan a target (especially one that is attacking you) just because it happens to be in the same galaxy as your flat-mate/work-buddy/friend/lover etc is clearly a stupid restriction under any circumstances.

Xontas had already made the desision arbitarily so why did he bother to ask us at all ?

The only reason I can suggest is that he wanted to piss everyone off pre-round just for the hell of it.

yeah sure i love abuse

but seriously, i made a desision about the systems min and max before i posted
the first system would have juts inforced the rules and would have settings 0 to all
but we did give you some room
the MH team desides how much room, not the community
its like mailing the makers of monopoly and telling them you think you should be able to stay in jail as long as you want.

they would tell you its not a good thing to do as people would use it to cheat
thats what we are doing now
these options are fair and the onlyone available at this time

[Heartless]

Originally Posted by xontas

yeah sure i love abuse

but seriously, i made a desision about the systems min and max before i posted
the first system would have juts inforced the rules and would have settings 0 to all
but we did give you some room
the MH team desides how much room, not the community
its like mailing the makers of monopoly and telling them you think you should be able to stay in jail as long as you want.

they would tell you its not a good thing to do as people would use it to cheat
thats what we are doing now
these options are fair and the onlyone available at this time

*cough*
I just spilt my beer when reading this.

If you want to compare monopoly's jail to anything in PA, then you have to compare it to protection mode, since there you also cannot be harmed but still earn resources.

[wakey]

Originally Posted by xontas

yeah sure i love abuse

but seriously, i made a desision about the systems min and max before i posted
the first system would have juts inforced the rules and would have settings 0 to all
but we did give you some room
the MH team desides how much room, not the community
its like mailing the makers of monopoly and telling them you think you should be able to stay in jail as long as you want.

they would tell you its not a good thing to do as people would use it to cheat
thats what we are doing now
these options are fair and the onlyone available at this time

The flaw in that is that the MH havent played this game for atleast a round, as such they hardly know the difficulties involved for a player without this feature. This is clear not only in some of the settings proposed BUT also some of the major omisions that have been made in the system. You yourself admitted to me some of the issue raised are issue yet your willing to let them happen and do their damage before even thinking of fixing them. Now I know your new to PATean and as such obviously want to stamp your mark on the game but repeating mistakes simerlar to those made in the past isnt the way to do it. Myself, jester and Heartless have all been part of PATeams that have gone in heavy handed with features that werent really ready and settings on these features that were too over the top and as a result the game had to spend rounds trying to recover from the lost players. The good thing was that these mistakes were learned from and it was just new mistakes being made rather than repeating old ones. However now it seems that the new batch of PATeam members are so green they missed out on seeing the mistakes being made as a player let alone from a more first hand position.

Basically what im saying is that this 'cheating' doesnt cause a great deal of damage to the game and as such its less damaging to go for a very loose system and tighten up from there than it is to go for a tight system and loosen up because by that stage the damage to the player base is done. Also ralise who is giving you adivice, if its a new player fine you might know more about the situation but if its old players who have played through such problem in the past listen to them as they know what the fall out for such things is and what a step back that can cuase the game

[Squidly]

Originally Posted by wakey

Basically what im saying is that this 'cheating' doesnt cause a great deal of damage to the game and as such its less damaging to go for a very loose system and tighten up from there than it is to go for a tight system and loosen up because by that stage the damage to the player base is done. Also ralise who is giving you adivice, if its a new player fine you might know more about the situation but if its old players who have played through such problem in the past listen to them as they know what the fall out for such things is and what a step back that can cuase the game

[useless]
Not sure I agree with that tbh... not all of it anyways... Cheating can damage the game. Especially if most of the top 20 fit the description as it was mentioned earlier Or a suspect amount of the winning alliance. Then there's problems.

Although that being said, I haven't the foggiest how to bust them for it though.

[/useless]

[wakey]

Originally Posted by Squidly

[useless]
Not sure I agree with that tbh... not all of it anyways... Cheating can damage the game. Especially if most of the top 20 fit the description as it was mentioned earlier Or a suspect amount of the winning alliance. Then there's problems.

Although that being said, I haven't the foggiest how to bust them for it though.

[/useless]

I wasnt saying cheating at all doesnt damage the game, just that the cheating features like this limit and help them remove dont do much damage on the grand scale of things. Its the low key cheating this covers rather than the high stakes cheating that does most of the damage. This kind of low key cheating quickly shows up as being suspicious and could be handled with a little bit of common sense and a good set of clear and visable guidelines

[Ramihyn]

Originally Posted by Squidly

[useless]
Not sure I agree with that tbh... not all of it anyways... Cheating can damage the game. Especially if most of the top 20 fit the description as it was mentioned earlier Or a suspect amount of the winning alliance. Then there's problems.

Although that being said, I haven't the foggiest how to bust them for it though.

[/useless]

Probably the only way to find some cheaters is social engineering - a spy they trust and talk to.

[derry]

Originally Posted by Squidly

[useless]
Not sure I agree with that tbh... not all of it anyways... Cheating can damage the game. Especially if most of the top 20 fit the description as it was mentioned earlier Or a suspect amount of the winning alliance. Then there's problems.

Although that being said, I haven't the foggiest how to bust them for it though.

[/useless]

cheating is indeed bad, but seeing this exeption system won't stop the real cheaters from cheating(the cheaters in T20 won't even notice this system is here hehe) where the only thing it does is stopping normal ppl who with other ppl on the same ip from "cheating" those ppl do in general the least damage, but they are the easiest caught so i reckon you prefer all those low damage "multies" above 1 big fish... as you already geussed that wouldn't be my way

just my 2 cents

[bwtmc]

The exception system can't be "that" bad. It's not like it encourages people who don't cheat, to cheat within generous (any attack/defence allowance whatsoever) limits with no fear of being closed.. Ohh no wait. It does..!

[god113]

Originally Posted by wakey

Flexable, are you sure. There isnt a great difference between the 5 options all of which are low enough for coincedential interaction to become an issue and possiblly causing them major problems later on.

And its this reason why people are bothered about the system, its the very definition of a 'dumb' system which can tell whats cleary not actual interaction. I mean lets be honest no-one here can argue that two people who do a number of scans 20 hours apart with asome of these overlapping is actually interacting, they will simply be looking for targets. We dont need 'dumb' systems on something like this we need 'smart' systems that arent going to stop people playing the game in a fair way.

I think I see what you're saying.

But instead of being constructive and saying things like 'we need an option looser than option 1, with no limits on x and y.' 'yes I agree, a looser option is better, and there doesn't need to be a limit on x and y' people chose to flame it and xontas. Which I don't think helped much.

To be honest, it isn't suprising at all in my eyes Xontas* and co have gone on the defencive and arn't taking in critisms too much now.

*I don't mean to single out Xontas, just saying him as he's the thread starter, although i'm sure other people are part of the idea.

[xontas]

that because like i told you time and time again, this tread was not supposed to be here for critisms
its here to give your opinion on the 5 options we started with but looking @ the responces i guess we will have to make up our own minds

then we will look @ how the system works and make changes if needed

i will say it again, this system only stops you making moves that are illegal and will get you closed if you make them
i dont see the problem in stoping people doing just that

i understand that some of you think the rules are wrong but thats a totaly diferent discussion and not one to make with the community
and i'll tell you why
this is a game a balances and choises, we have to make sure that balance is not broken.
thats why we sometimes have to make inpopular desisions!

so we will anounce the settings half way true the public preview
and there will be a input tread

[relik]

I'm home for the summer, so not so much of an issue until the end of August...but during the schoolyear, I'm on a network with several thousand others. I honestly don't have a clue how many, if any, of those people also play Planetarion (and would therefore be just as clueless as to which of them were allies/enemies/galaxy members).

Now I personally lack the networking knowledge to know how IPs are assigned within the network, so maybe I'm jumping to conclusions, but will situations like this be taken into account?

[god113]

Xontas, I presume that the thing pasted below was aimed at me:

Originally Posted by xontas

that because like i told you time and time again, this tread was not supposed to be here for critisms
its here to give your opinion on the 5 options we started with but looking @ the responces i guess we will have to make up our own minds

In which case, replace the word 'critisms' with 'opinions' in my post, and then I still stick by it.

[xontas]

yes, we do look for work and school networks and consider the fact that you might be unaware of interaction
you can ask a admin if they see other accounts on your ip to make sure

[xontas]

no actualy, i dont mind people that voice there opinion, but if you have voiced it you dont have to repeat it
it was pointed @ wakey who is making the same point over and over again
i get it, i understand it, i dont agree!
but we do take it into consideration!
so for now we have 5 options that you could vote on
and then we will see what changes are needed

[Judge]

Originally Posted by xontas

yes, we do look for work and school networks and consider the fact that you might be unaware of interaction
you can ask a admin if they see other accounts on your ip to make sure

Which would be absolutely useless, as you would then know you have another player on your shared network, but still have no idea who it is.

Unlikely that the admins would or could tell you that, as the Data Protection Act forbids it (UK) and as Jolt is a UK company it would apply.

[xontas]

but we mail that person ingame and tell them

[JammyJim]

Right ive talked with xontas for about 20minutes and re-read the entire thread again. The impression i first got from reading this was that the exception system was simply another tool for catching cheaters and people who didnt 'add their housemates etc' to the exception system.

However, upon further analysis it isnt that at all. Fundamentally nothing really changes in the game. This is not a tool for PaTeam. It is a tool for you guys.

Say for example you live in a house of 5 people and you all share the same ip. you all want to play but your worried that you will get done for multiying. If you add yourself to the exception system then it simply stops you from interacting once certain limits have been reached (those to be set as my understanding goes). However if your in a university and your on a shared ip with people youve never even met then you cant possibly add yourself to the exception system.

As such the tool is useless. If you interact with someone from your uni (which lets face it is not exactly likely) then you will be subject to the usual MH interrogation should you be caught and they think that the correlations point to cheating. Nothing changes. This would have happened before the exception system and will continue to work after its been put into place.

The exception system is simply a new way to let people in the same house who do want to play together but are worried about being accused of cheating or multying to play safe in the knowledge that they cant be accused of anything.

for those who share ips with people they dont know and have never met then the system is the same as the old one. Its just dealt with by the MH who analyse the correlations and make a decision same as before...

As such i dont really see what all the fuss is about.

[Jester]

Originally Posted by JammyJim

The exception system is simply a new way to let people in the same house who do want to play together but are worried about being accused of cheating or multying to play safe in the knowledge that they cant be accused of anything.

The problem is that this creates definite limits for cheaters (ie they still gain a definite advantage) and, far more importantly, it attempts to ruin friends playing together.

However, this problem is not really directly connected to the new exception tool, but the policy which it enforces. And as such there's no real point in making a big fuss about it.

[aif]

hmmm xontas ... if someone realy likes to play with cheat it can easly be done .... say u have access to 2-10 diff IP´s (true vp Nett/vnc ect ect)

u can easly play 10 accounts ... as u cant get any prof. that they cheat (as long as cheater knows the game IE: dont send all 10 planets diff ticks at his real planet)

rember becouse of these rules (of IP shareing not beeing alowed/played normal) ppl quit playing PA ... as they live in large studets houses ect ... i can say for my part i know around 9 ppl in RL (that played pa be4) that dont play PA becouse they cant play together and work as a team... :/

i know its hard to find cheaters but COME On most of the cheaters will get away with it !!!!!!

dont ruin the game for ppl that realy likes to play .....

aif

[xontas]

like JJ said
this is not a multi hunting tool

this is for people that play from the same ip and want to be able to
they have to conform to the limit set by us, but those same limits will get you closed if you dont have a exception

if you DO have a exception and reach those limits, you get told that your action is not alowed and it wont let you, nothing more

people keep pointing out that ip cheats are rare, they are not
so we do hunt them and keep hunting them

[wakey]

Originally Posted by JammyJim

Right ive talked with xontas for about 20minutes and re-read the entire thread again. The impression i first got from reading this was that the exception system was simply another tool for catching cheaters and people who didnt 'add their housemates etc' to the exception system.

However, upon further analysis it isnt that at all. Fundamentally nothing really changes in the game. This is not a tool for PaTeam. It is a tool for you guys.

Say for example you live in a house of 5 people and you all share the same ip. you all want to play but your worried that you will get done for multiying. If you add yourself to the exception system then it simply stops you from interacting once certain limits have been reached (those to be set as my understanding goes). However if your in a university and your on a shared ip with people youve never even met then you cant possibly add yourself to the exception system.

As such the tool is useless. If you interact with someone from your uni (which lets face it is not exactly likely) then you will be subject to the usual MH interrogation should you be caught and they think that the correlations point to cheating. Nothing changes. This would have happened before the exception system and will continue to work after its been put into place.

The exception system is simply a new way to let people in the same house who do want to play together but are worried about being accused of cheating or multying to play safe in the knowledge that they cant be accused of anything.

for those who share ips with people they dont know and have never met then the system is the same as the old one. Its just dealt with by the MH who analyse the correlations and make a decision same as before...

As such i dont really see what all the fuss is about.

Everyone is fully aware that in theory it changes nothing the problem is in practice is does due to the definition of interaction being used.Now you say interaction isnt likly however when your taking the view that interaction is undertaking an event that someone on your IP has done in the last 24 hours and includes things like scanning a galaxy that they have already scanned and it makes interaction fairly easy. As I have said a number of times theres a number of interactions which last round the MH wouldnt have bothered about without other evidence which this system will now count as interaction and this could then lead to problems later (Scanning someone attacking you for example to then find that they cant scan as they have used their galaxy exceptions

@xontas: I dont see anyone saying IP cheats are rare, what they are saying if they are the low key cheaters whom dont do the major damage. In fact the extra roids they bring might actually even offset the problems they cause

[xontas]

this tools doesnt mean we are not looking for the none ip sharing cheats
its not like we are doing only one thing
this tool is there to alowe normal play
the scan and co-op limits suggested are based on a cross section of normal planets in the game (50) and what there level of interaction was
in reality normal planets dont interact that much, 1 or 2 times a week and sometimes not @ all.
yes it CAN happen that you incounter the limit because of random interaction
but that should be very rare

we will not widen the settings for people wanting to share gals or alliances
we dont recomend you do that as the limits will get in the way very fast
but the choise in this is yours!

[Heartless]

Originally Posted by xontas

[...]
we will not widen the settings for people wanting to share gals or alliances
we dont recomend you do that as the limits will get in the way very fast
but the choise in this is yours!

Indeed. And my choice is to play a different game in such cases.
The way this policy is now enforced is causing a constant loss of possible new players which just notice "oh, we cannot start playing together". Most of them do not care about possible cheaters on the first look.

Try to be your own possible new customer guys and girls.

[aif]

xontas i was not saying that the new tool would be bad ... just that ppl that live togeather/play at school/ect ect REALY like to team up(def each other and go on raids togeather ...) yea some will cheat but the key players/ally´s that like to cheat will do it ...

this system should be in play for top 100-200 players .. that way PA would make more money as more players + more ppl = more roids in uni. (even tho maybe 10% of the uni are multi accounts) BUT as soon as u get into top 100-200 ur level of interaction would be in play.

and this way u can even get evidense of ppl cheating if they let the 2 account die out when they hit 100-200 rank..

just an idea .

[xontas]

you keep taking about the policy now enforced
why is it not sinking in

IT HAS NOT CHANGED
so please stop saying it did
its just not true

we just inforce the same policy in a diferent way where you get MORE options to interact without being closed for being multi
it has NOTHING to do with hunting multi's
it has NOTHING to do with limiting people so they cant play
its there to alowe normal play between same ip accounts, without getting closed in the proces

what you want is to act like a multi, play from the same ip and not get closed
if thats what you want, yes you need a other game!

[Phil^]

i'd approach any suggestion which would increase the number of cheat planets in the game with extreme caution personally.
more multi accounts = more roids = more farms for alliances, and could alter which alliance ends up on top after a period of time

[Forest]

Indeed, I am not against anything that makes the game less cheat free.

It makes me feel safer.

Hmm, /me looks at his sig.

[Judge]

Originally Posted by Heartless

*cough*
I just spilt my beer when reading this.

People have been flogged for less.

HANG HIM

[xontas]

spilling beer is not good
maby we should have a beer spilling limit in the exception system :-)

[god113]

Originally Posted by xontas

spilling beer is not good
maby we should have a beer spilling limit in the exception system :-)

From options 1-5, spill your beer twice and you get deleted.

From life that is.

[Squidly]

err... forest... not to be a jerk or anything... but, I fully realize you're not a big fan of xontas: in which case, could you take it up with him and maybe *not* ban him out of channels that aren't yours, and trying to incriminate him in any way you possibly can? =/


--fixed--

[xontas]

/me hugs squidly

[Ramihyn]

Originally Posted by xontas

you keep taking about the policy now enforced
why is it not sinking in

IT HAS NOT CHANGED
so please stop saying it did
its just not true

I am not constantly following PA so the following may just apply to me, but i didnt know that basically the rules for MHs where changed to such a restrictive way that two planets on "the same IP" (read: the visible IP to PA is the same) which "interact" results in deletion of both planets. Because it seems like thats basically the "rule" lately.

You are probably getting such a big argument here about it because it was for the first time clearly stated in public (you know - with the whole "secrecy" about MH rules, tools and all that i the past).

But maybe it was publicly told in the past and i just missed it.

Originally Posted by xontas

what you want is to act like a multi, play from the same ip and not get closed
if thats what you want, yes you need a other game!

As i mentioned at least twice in this and another thread lately - no serious multi runs multiple planets from the same IP. Again - it has been known since at least Rd 4 that IPs are _de fakto_ _THE_ big thing which is looked for (mainly because in the past there where not too many other options).

Yes you may get the occasional multi who simply runs several planets from a single machine/IP but they will learn quickly what mistake it is once those planets got closed.

[xontas]

you state that no serious multi runs his planets from the same ip
thats not true
we had 400 cases of muli's on the same ip
and there where some mighty big ones there!

yes your system would be a option is it was legal 2 do so
not sure it is, but we are looking @ options to do just that

we are gonna discusse the rules of the game in public a lot more!
why, to make people aware of the rules, because its harsh to close someone for cheating when they dont know it is cheating, (altho the rules are in the EULA )

the tools will stay a secret, i know some of them are fairly obvious but some are not, and we are not gonna tell you what things we look @

hope this clears it up a bit for you

[Ramihyn]

Originally Posted by xontas

you state that no serious multi runs his planets from the same ip
thats not true
we had 400 cases of muli's on the same ip
and there where some mighty big ones there!

Name them so we all can publicly call them N00bs

Originally Posted by xontas

we are gonna discusse the rules of the game in public a lot more!
why, to make people aware of the rules, because its harsh to close someone for cheating when they dont know it is cheating, (altho the rules are in the EULA )

the tools will stay a secret, i know some of them are fairly obvious but some are not, and we are not gonna tell you what things we look @

hope this clears it up a bit for you

Yes thanks - good to hear.

[xontas]

well, i do have a whiteboard @ my house with some ip''s and some names on it :-)
but sharing that list is a no-no :-)
tho i love the guy that signs up every round with 4 accounts having the exact same details (account1, account2 and so on)
and when he gets closed (4 rounds in a row now) he claims its his 3 brothes!

yeah, sure

a wall of shame is not what we want, everybody starts @ 0 for mh on a new round
past cheating only makes us look @ you again next round, but you dont get punished twise!
so, if your clean you have nothing to fear
having a wall of shame would make the punishment last and we are here to create fun
that will conflict with having fun in a MAJOR way :-)

[derry]

you state that no serious multi runs his planets from the same ip thats not true we had 400 cases of muli's on the same ip and there where some mighty big ones there!

i would be able to get to 400 aswell if you close family members who haven't cheated a full round, but get closed for to much interaction (no shit, same alliance, same attack pack, and brothers heh)

ofc they seem like multi's (for you) and they did not complain to much when they got closed (cause they could see the point you made) and accepted it, but still, it ruined the round for 2 galaxies in this case, and i know from a fact that they didn't cheat, but hey, thats life...