|
22 Nov 2005, 23:55
|
#1
|
Insomniac
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 3,583
|
Opinions please
Following on from this
Should defence farms be specifically stated in the eula that they are forbidden?
By defence farm i mean : "Planets created for the sole purpose of assisting an existing alliance, while not becoming part of that alliance themselves."
In effect, a set of planets , controlled by another alliance to give them an unfair advantage over the rest.
This could be extended to include planets who attack / escort / soak up defence solely for the benefit of this alliance, and if it should go as far as to extend to scan planets is another item to consider.
What precisely the level of proof required for the multihunters to close on that, i'll leave to them to decide - it could even be phrased as "any ingame method, known or unknown which gives players or alliances an unfair advantage over other planets or alliances is forbidden. If the advantage is unfair or not is entirely admin discretion" , a nice little catch-all type thing like that
I just want to know if you think it should be banned, and why. and if not, why not
Last edited by Phil^; 23 Nov 2005 at 00:07.
|
|
|
23 Nov 2005, 00:10
|
#2
|
Inactive peon
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 6,050
|
Re: Opinions please
this is my personal opinion, and not an offical view of PATeam:
I'd say that if we ban defence of non - cluster/galaxy/alliance then this rule isn't needed and therefore I would vote no.
I don't think there should be a poll, as then people would think PATeam should be bound by its result
|
|
|
23 Nov 2005, 00:11
|
#3
|
1up on you
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Birmingham, UK
Posts: 4,007
|
Re: Opinions please
I think they should be banned, its like creating two alliances, except one just defends/escorts which severly unbalances the game.
__________________
pig
[ 1u p]
|
|
|
23 Nov 2005, 00:15
|
#4
|
All is lost all is lost:P
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 21
|
Re: Opinions please
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kal
I'd say that if we ban defence of non - cluster/galaxy/alliance then this rule isn't needed and therefore I would vote no.result
|
I think thats a very good idea, will keep people from using such def planets, its cheating, no more no less.
__________________
Purpose of life is to end
[ 1up]
|
|
|
23 Nov 2005, 00:18
|
#5
|
Up The Hatters!
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Kenilworth Road
Posts: 3,012
|
Re: Opinions please
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kal
this is my personal opinion, and not an offical view of PATeam:
I'd say that if we ban defence of non - cluster/galaxy/alliance then this rule isn't needed and therefore I would vote no.
I don't think there should be a poll, as then people would think PATeam should be bound by its result
|
again, I disagree with you on this. because it makes it impossible to do jpscans for scanners.
But the again, you want to remove jpscans since you think newsscans are the only thing that is needed wich is tbh not a good idea..
__________________
Planetarion veteran
|
|
|
23 Nov 2005, 00:21
|
#6
|
Insomniac
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 3,583
|
Re: Opinions please
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kargool
again, I disagree with you on this. because it makes it impossible to do jpscans for scanners.
|
no it wouldnt
anyone attacking can send a jgp, since this rule would apply to defence only.
any scanner who sends their fleet to defend will be able to jgp if they are in the alliance, galaxy or cluster.
This would probably force scanners to go in the alliance but it doesnt make it impossible to JGPs
|
|
|
23 Nov 2005, 00:22
|
#7
|
Up The Hatters!
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Kenilworth Road
Posts: 3,012
|
Re: Opinions please
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil^
no it wouldnt
anyone attacking can send a jgp, since this rule would apply to defence only.
any scanner who sends their fleet to defend will be able to jgp if they are in the alliance, galaxy or cluster.
This would probably force scanners to go in the alliance but it doesnt make it impossible to JGPs
|
No.. it wont. because when a target is below the scanners hit value he cant jpscan it.
__________________
Planetarion veteran
|
|
|
23 Nov 2005, 00:24
|
#8
|
Insomniac
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 3,583
|
Re: Opinions please
a target below the value of that of a scanner - surely only newbie bashers would be affected by this?
scanners usually are comparatively small themselves, it would take a considerable achievement for anyone to be below their bash limit - plus as you pointed out theres news scans as a backup in such an event anyway
anyway back on topic, do you agree or disagree with banning it kargool?
|
|
|
23 Nov 2005, 00:30
|
#9
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: somewhere
Posts: 130
|
Re: Opinions please
i say ban tbh
about the jgp matter... make em avaible 500(just switch FA and jgp, and let JGP take 450 ticks ) ticks later then they are now and it should be good
__________________
[18:45] <Helix> if two wrongs dont make a right its twice as wrong to do something wrong to right it
[00:22] <Doom> Where as in most cases it appears multing is an individual thing, LDK organises it and uses it. Making it an effective unit with a small number of players. It makes sense just not part of the rules. They just organised cheating =-)
|
|
|
23 Nov 2005, 00:32
|
#10
|
Inactive peon
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 6,050
|
Re: Opinions please
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kargool
again, I disagree with you on this. because it makes it impossible to do jpscans for scanners.
But the again, you want to remove jpscans since you think newsscans are the only thing that is needed wich is tbh not a good idea..
|
scans are changing in PAN
|
|
|
23 Nov 2005, 00:36
|
#11
|
Up The Hatters!
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Kenilworth Road
Posts: 3,012
|
Re: Opinions please
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil^
a target below the value of that of a scanner - surely only newbie bashers would be affected by this?
scanners usually are comparatively small themselves, it would take a considerable achievement for anyone to be below their bash limit - plus as you pointed out theres news scans as a backup in such an event anyway
anyway back on topic, do you agree or disagree with banning it kargool?
|
ofc I agree, but I would love to see some actual proof for all theese accusations...
Im beginning to think that these threads keep being created by paranoid people..
__________________
Planetarion veteran
|
|
|
23 Nov 2005, 00:39
|
#12
|
Commodore
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 3,176
|
Re: Opinions please
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil^
I just want to know if you think it should be banned, and why. and if not, why not
|
I think the magnitude of the response should depend on the level of the problem - to what extent is this being (ab)used in-game? how frequently does it succeed? are pre-existing counters, such as conventional retal or so on, effective in this case? Why are some players choosing to play in their alliance but not be in their alliance - is this a problem of some other fundamental problem that should be addressed, instead of a band-aid solution?
Answers to those is what i would rather hear first .
__________________
#Strategy ; #Support - Sovereign
--- --- ---
"The Cake is a Lie."
|
|
|
23 Nov 2005, 00:43
|
#13
|
Insomniac
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 3,583
|
Re: Opinions please
no idea to what extent its being used, or if its happening at all - following up on a previous thread. just asking if people think its something which should be forbidden or not.
as to why this would be happening, if it is : since when have people needed a reason why , if it gives them an advantage in the end.
Its a sad fact that there are those who dont care about anything other then winning , at any cost.
|
|
|
23 Nov 2005, 01:07
|
#14
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,174
|
Re: Opinions please
Most of my attacks are deffed by planets with 5k vipers and 100 spiders.
__________________
If one person is in delusion, they're called insane.
If many people are in delusion, it's called a religion.
|
|
|
23 Nov 2005, 01:23
|
#15
|
PGLee
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 70
|
Re: Opinions please
it would be good to ban it, but then there's alos the issue of,
say for eg, i meet a n00b in my galaxy, befriend him, and tell him to build pure vipers, and he defends me all the time. Would that be banned? And no, he didn't bpack with me, and he is a random. unpaid too
__________________
Rd 14 - [Hydra Officer]
Rd 15 - [eXi Officer]
|
|
|
23 Nov 2005, 01:38
|
#16
|
Commodore
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 3,176
|
Re: Opinions please
Quote:
Originally Posted by sniborp
Most of my attacks are deffed by planets with 5k vipers and 100 spiders.
|
Send their co-ords to all the small players in your alliance for free roids - particularly anti FI, DE, CR, BA (and prolly CO ) - plus some Guardian action in a fleetcatch to really neuter the planet might be in order if they begin to irk you.
:\
__________________
#Strategy ; #Support - Sovereign
--- --- ---
"The Cake is a Lie."
|
|
|
23 Nov 2005, 02:07
|
#17
|
LDK
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Norway
Posts: 2,220
|
Re: Opinions please
Hehe
The - 1 eta for alliances isnt enough?
Surely it should be possible to def m8s not in ur alliance.
But yeah, remove another aspect of the game.
Will make it easier to get more people along to do summit else another place
Also - it IS kinda illegal already, as I ve seen numerous of dubious closures from biased MHs regarding the matter.
People should understand that m8s help each other. One round u r not able to play for real, and therefore help ur m8s, next round its the other way around.
Having m8s used to matter in pa.
All that matters now is if u r m8s with the mhs. ^^
__________________
[Omen]
Quote:
Originally posted by Newt
I would give me right testicle to be in a gal with you wishmaster!!! wonder if thatd be enough to bribe spinner with hmmmm
|
<JC`> i sent him a msg saying Wishmaster 0wns, so he recalled
|
|
|
23 Nov 2005, 02:25
|
#18
|
PGLee
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 70
|
Re: Opinions please
in some ways what wishmaster is saying is true, PA is about mates too... we make friends, and some decide to help us only, is that going to be an issue ?
__________________
Rd 14 - [Hydra Officer]
Rd 15 - [eXi Officer]
|
|
|
23 Nov 2005, 02:34
|
#19
|
Flash in the PAN
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Birmingham, Romania
Posts: 554
|
Re: Opinions please
With no -1 eta for non alliance are these planets really a problem?
I dont like the idea of them existing one bit - dont get me wrong !
But you should be able to def anywhere in the universe - for people who play battlegroups outside of their alliance, or simply those with friends in need.
|
|
|
23 Nov 2005, 05:27
|
#20
|
Doh!
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit
Posts: 1,720
|
Re: Opinions please
If you remove the ability of non-allied players to defend, it will make it even more difficult for them to play.
In effect you would change the nature of the game to an Alliance war, and nothing else.
However if what u are getting at is multiple ownership (use of) planets as defence sinks then obvioiusly they should be removed?
Perhaps the solition would be to remove the -1 eta bonus completely, thus alliances would only be able to defend with non-same type ships.
ie: you would need a Xan to defend a BS/CR attack using his fr/de ships to get the eta 9
in-gal would remain at eta 5, thus strenghthening galaxy ties.
|
|
|
23 Nov 2005, 06:32
|
#21
|
All is lost all is lost:P
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 21
|
Re: Opinions please
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shyne
With no -1 eta for non alliance are these planets really a problem?
|
Belive you me its a problem, think of xan Fr vs vipers
Quote:
Originally Posted by whismaster
Hehe
The - 1 eta for alliances isnt enough?
Surely it should be possible to def m8s not in ur alliance.
But yeah, remove another aspect of the game.
Will make it easier to get more people along to do summit else another place
Also - it IS kinda illegal already, as I ve seen numerous of dubious closures from biased MHs regarding the matter.
People should understand that m8s help each other. One round u r not able to play for real, and therefore help ur m8s, next round its the other way around.
Having m8s used to matter in pa.
All that matters now is if u r m8s with the mhs. ^^
|
I fins this very amusing comming from you, dont ask why.
__________________
Purpose of life is to end
[ 1up]
|
|
|
23 Nov 2005, 08:26
|
#22
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Austria, Vienna
Posts: 326
|
Re: Opinions please
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil^
"any ingame method, known or unknown which gives players or alliances an unfair advantage over other planets or alliances is forbidden. If the advantage is unfair or not is entirely admin discretion"
I just want to know if you think it should be banned, and why. and if not, why not
|
this will NEVER work if we have Multihunters who are biased and are connected to the community and know many of their members.
i can already see it: u got closed coz, well, i uhm... yeah i think u got an unfair advantage.
on topic: i don't think it should be banned; if someone made friends in PA who are willing to spend the entire round with helping you out; then u deserve that defence. if u are a stupid ass that nobody likes, than u obviously won't have m8s who def u all round.
also: would it be an unfair ingame advantage if 10 allies gang up to bash 1 ally? how shall ppl know what admins will think is unfair?
__________________
eXilition
|
|
|
23 Nov 2005, 08:51
|
#23
|
CRASHING BEATS 'N FANTASY
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Cold Country.
Posts: 1,912
|
Re: Opinions please
This does very much remind me on the farming debate a few rounds ago (before round 5, wasn't it?)
All the farmers argued that farming would be an alternative style of playing and should be allowed.
All the non-farmers argued different (iirc they said 'farming is undermining what this game is supposed to be').
In the end farming got banned because in most cases multi accounts were used for it.
I see the same coming for those def planets, even though Kal's vision of implementing such a ban is still way too flawed and allows way too many options to still use such "def farms" as people call it.
__________________
Ià! Ià! Munin F'tagn! - [*scendancy]
|
|
|
23 Nov 2005, 09:15
|
#24
|
The Original Carebear
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Trondheim, Norway
Posts: 1,048
|
Re: Opinions please
More than 60% of my attacks are defended in-cluster or in-gal by some viperwhore with 3k vipers and 50 mosquito. I wouldn't have a problem with banning it, and to Wishmasters "friends argument" - my friends build other ships than vipers. They play for themselves, and not only to defwhore me and my other friends. That is the difference.
PS! Those 60% happened the last 10 days only. I find it disturbing.
__________________
If at first you don't succeed, try, try again. Then quit. No use being a damn fool about it.
Oh crap, I might be back. I should take my own advice.
Last edited by qebab; 23 Nov 2005 at 09:18.
Reason: Added a "PS"
|
|
|
23 Nov 2005, 09:48
|
#25
|
The Original Terran
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Afghan atm
Posts: 1,633
|
Re: Opinions please
creating planets just for defence is lcreating planets just for attacks or planets just for roids to give an alliance an advantage over everyone else.
The 80 ppl limit is there for a reason if a planet within the 80 ppl then thats there loss but then it would get hard to control because then you could make a dummy alliance for that sole purpose to.
Any defence planets should be banned in my opinion but I doubt they will.
__________________
introduction-Gramma
The following is a list of problems found in various places throughout the manual and game. We love you Noah!
Written by Kloopy Wed Mar 16 22:06:43 2005
Retired just for a bit....
Proud to have been 1up, SiN, Wolfpack, Bluetuba and the leader of ARK.
|
|
|
23 Nov 2005, 10:20
|
#26
|
Idle Git
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Wandering
Posts: 1,550
|
Re: Opinions please
I think it's a bad idea, as whilst it would stop the defence issues mentioned, I think it would have wider consequences on the community. It also looks to me too much like telling players how to play rather than letting them play themselves, which in essence removes all point to the game.
I suspect most such planets are multi's, and as such multihunters should try and find the evidence that proves them as such. Suggesting using something else to stop them means one of 2 things:
1. They are not multi's and are legitimate planets, in which case I really don't see that forcing them to change the way they play because some vocal members of the community don't like it seems a bad idea to me. Ask the smaller players, I'm sure they'd say they don't like being hit in galaxy attacks by alliances, does that mean we should ban alliances from hitting more than 1 planet per galaxy?
2. The multihunters have no teeth. Obviously, this would need addressing, and from various things I've heard, I suspect this would be the most likely of the 2 options.
__________________
Here we go again....
|
|
|
23 Nov 2005, 11:10
|
#27
|
Drink is Good
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 2,122
|
Re: Opinions please
Ive been defended against several times by planets with 9 roids, and only viper ships, its rather annoying considering they can make the eta easily. If they ARE legitimate planets then fair enough to them, but i suspect most arent
__________________
Can we please have a moment of silence...........
|
|
|
23 Nov 2005, 12:10
|
#28
|
Lost
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Scotland
Posts: 413
|
Re: Opinions please
Banning out of gal and alliance defence fleets wont work
It will make clusters obsolete. I know not a lot of peolpe use them but some people do and taking that away from them is not a goood idea. It will prevent friends helping out friends. During my playing careear i would defend people out of my gal and alliance just to give them a hand and gain some shippies in return. And the most important fact it will not get rid of multi defence planets at all.
The alliances who are involved in using them will just start to buddy them up with their members. Unless you propose we ban all out of alliance defence(anyone who says this should be taken out and shot) So the problems arnt sorted. The defence planets are still there.
But untill people actually stop cheating then their is no quick fix solution to this problem. We will redesin our tools to help catch them and will continue to work tirelessly to make the game a better place for you guys. But while their are still people who cant play fair and win on their own without breaking the rules then we are always gonna have problems
As regarding being biased i have been denying it for some time now but its about time me and the rest of the team came out and told the truth. We are extremly biased against people who cheat and break the rules im sorry but its true we can help out selfs as soon as we see these planets we just want to close them.
Also i would apreciate people not talking about cases that have nothing to do with them. You do not know the facts of them, you have 1 persons account of how they dont cheat. Im pretty sure they edit out the facts of the case that cast a bad light on them, and to be honest their entiteled to do that. After someone has been closed then i have no more problems with that person and if they want to lie about it thats their desicion. Once someone has been punished for their crimes they are free to go in my opinion. We do not close without evidence and if people query the desicion it is reviewed independently by another member of the team who also makes his desicion on the evidence at hand.
Do you want a MH team who close people for cheating or dont you?
Kind Regards
Squishy
__________________
Squishy
|
|
|
23 Nov 2005, 12:51
|
#29
|
Most unimportant guy...
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Kvinesdal
Posts: 1,393
|
Re: Opinions please
I think one shud only be able to def alliance and galaxy.
And defwh0res r good. Got some in Insomnia that play semi-retired and simply just 3fleet def almost allt he time
__________________
When we discover the centre of the universe, alot of people will be shocked and dissapointed to know that they are not it!
Retired
|
|
|
23 Nov 2005, 13:06
|
#30
|
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: ******
Posts: 2,326
|
Re: Opinions please
Quote:
Originally Posted by Squishy
It will make clusters obsolete.
|
Wait. Clusters aren't obsolete?
|
|
|
23 Nov 2005, 13:50
|
#31
|
Lost
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Scotland
Posts: 413
|
Re: Opinions please
Some people use them still im sure. And they can add a nice dynamic into the game when theirs block wars
__________________
Squishy
|
|
|
23 Nov 2005, 14:10
|
#32
|
The Original Terran
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Afghan atm
Posts: 1,633
|
Re: Opinions please
Quote:
Originally Posted by Squishy
Some people use them still im sure. And they can add a nice dynamic into the game when theirs block wars
|
We tried using it in round 12 squishy before you retired \o/
Shame it didnt work though . Some alliances dont like ppl defending more than 1 fleet in gal and then you have alliance defence to have at least once a day where possible.
So very rarely ppl commit a fleet to helping in cluster defence, just look in most cluster chans you get max of 20 ppl most of the time and thats if ur an active cluster and when a last resort defence call comes up everyone goes very quite....
__________________
introduction-Gramma
The following is a list of problems found in various places throughout the manual and game. We love you Noah!
Written by Kloopy Wed Mar 16 22:06:43 2005
Retired just for a bit....
Proud to have been 1up, SiN, Wolfpack, Bluetuba and the leader of ARK.
|
|
|
24 Nov 2005, 10:33
|
#33
|
thinking, that's all.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 867
|
Re: Opinions please
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bashar
I think it's a bad idea, as whilst it would stop the defence issues mentioned, I think it would have wider consequences on the community. It also looks to me too much like telling players how to play rather than letting them play themselves, which in essence removes all point to the game.
I suspect most such planets are multi's, and as such multihunters should try and find the evidence that proves them as such. Suggesting using something else to stop them means one of 2 things:
1. They are not multi's and are legitimate planets, in which case I really don't see that forcing them to change the way they play because some vocal members of the community don't like it seems a bad idea to me. Ask the smaller players, I'm sure they'd say they don't like being hit in galaxy attacks by alliances, does that mean we should ban alliances from hitting more than 1 planet per galaxy?
2. The multihunters have no teeth. Obviously, this would need addressing, and from various things I've heard, I suspect this would be the most likely of the 2 options.
|
I'd say that's about right.
Clusters have been obselete throughout PAX, they have no implications on competitive gameplay whatsoever.
"It will prevent friends helping out friends. During my playing careear i would defend people out of my gal and alliance just to give them a hand and gain some shippies in return. And the most important fact it will not get rid of multi defence planets at all."
That bit though is completely relevant.
__________________
[1up], Ascendancy Events Organiser & eXilition HC
|
|
|
24 Nov 2005, 10:49
|
#34
|
The brother of Spammer
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Paisley - Scotland
Posts: 2,352
|
Re: Opinions please
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kargool
again, I disagree with you on this. because it makes it impossible to do jpscans for scanners.
But the again, you want to remove jpscans since you think newsscans are the only thing that is needed wich is tbh not a good idea..
|
They can just scan, rather than be def whores...
|
|
|
24 Nov 2005, 10:53
|
#35
|
The brother of Spammer
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Paisley - Scotland
Posts: 2,352
|
Re: Opinions please
Quote:
Originally Posted by Squishy
But untill people actually stop cheating then their is no quick fix solution to this problem. We will redesin our tools to help catch them and will continue to work tirelessly to make the game a better place for you guys. But while their are still people who cant play fair and win on their own without breaking the rules then we are always gonna have problems
|
Thats what these def pools are. It does go against the spirit of the game.
|
|
|
24 Nov 2005, 11:04
|
#36
|
Drunken Boozer
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 298
|
Re: Opinions please
as long as those defplanets arent multies let them be. if you think a special ally is getting alot of help from another "defally" go get another real ally to help you out attacking and teach them a real lesson!!!
__________________
Geilheit ist KEINE Schande !!!!
! [ToT]-KC !
Äscendäncy, we got Penis inside!
|
|
|
24 Nov 2005, 11:14
|
#37
|
The brother of Spammer
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Paisley - Scotland
Posts: 2,352
|
Re: Opinions please
Quote:
Originally Posted by DunkelGraf
as long as those defplanets arent multies let them be. if you think a special ally is getting alot of help from another "defally" go get another real ally to help you out attacking and teach them a real lesson!!!
|
One thing I have done with inactives in my galaxy (the ones who are online and dont use irc and/or respond to PA mail) and have the profile of a "def pool" is to get my ally or galm8's ally to roid/ziked these planets and then exile them asap.
that is my definition of teaching them a lesson.
|
|
|
24 Nov 2005, 12:35
|
#38
|
The Original Terran
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Afghan atm
Posts: 1,633
|
Re: Opinions please
Quote:
Originally Posted by buddies
One thing I have done with inactives in my galaxy (the ones who are online and dont use irc and/or respond to PA mail) and have the profile of a "def pool" is to get my ally or galm8's ally to roid/ziked these planets and then exile them asap.
that is my definition of teaching them a lesson.
|
Just report them with evidence.
You attacking them urself or your gal/alliance mates could be accused of farming them if it all looks a bit sus so reporting them is best course of action and maybe hammering the ppl who they defend would work out better.
__________________
introduction-Gramma
The following is a list of problems found in various places throughout the manual and game. We love you Noah!
Written by Kloopy Wed Mar 16 22:06:43 2005
Retired just for a bit....
Proud to have been 1up, SiN, Wolfpack, Bluetuba and the leader of ARK.
|
|
|
24 Nov 2005, 12:49
|
#39
|
The brother of Spammer
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Paisley - Scotland
Posts: 2,352
|
Re: Opinions please
I am open to hearing methods of gathering evidence to catch these planets.
|
|
|
24 Nov 2005, 15:48
|
#40
|
Lost
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Scotland
Posts: 413
|
Re: Opinions please
Ok if people are gonna quote me i have no problems what so ever. But please quote in context and not just selected parts of the statements that currenlty suit your arguments.
I dont have the exact logs here so i will put down what i said might not be in the right order or the exact wording though
Question: why not just stop ALL exceptions all together ? (ie not let anyone play from the same IP)
Answer: This would be even more detramental to the game and would lose us many good honest players.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Question: if an entire alliance or galaxy if found to be doing this and the feeling is that its to much of a loss to remove the planets why not just remove 25% of the planets mines and ship totals
Answer: It is not fair to punish a whole alliance for the actions of a few individuals within said alliance. We cannot punish everyone as many people were playing the game in a good honest fashion. It is not their fault that others in the alliance were abusing the rules.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Question: if people cant be traced due to ip blockers and things cant u block such a player
Answer: not really sure what to say here. We are suppose to block players using VNC? so block anyone with an open port that can be used for VNC purposes? Many people use VNC in an honest fashion for things such as work and other none pa cheating reasons we cannot delete all their planets because of this.
I hope this clarifys things a little bit. Anyone wants any other information i will be happy to disclose it
__________________
Squishy
Last edited by Squishy; 24 Nov 2005 at 15:58.
|
|
|
24 Nov 2005, 17:18
|
#41
|
Toyboy
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: At Home
Posts: 190
|
Re: Opinions please
I think they should be banned including incluster barring any valid proper reason against it, and don't give me the cluster alliance crap. I think we all know that most of the alliances, especially the major ones ignore this. Conceivably with c def allowed support planets will just exile to a particular c.
Alternatively we can also make that some alliances can have support planets and the other alliances get 1/2 extra fleets per planet and a 35% mining bonus.
I trust you all get I mean by that.
__________________
The Ministry
|
|
|
24 Nov 2005, 20:57
|
#42
|
PGLee
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 70
|
Re: Opinions please
dude, this is the same as 2 allies having a "agreement" to defend each other. OR when they attack together. It's basically the same thing.... legitamate planets doing the same thing.
__________________
Rd 14 - [Hydra Officer]
Rd 15 - [eXi Officer]
|
|
|
24 Nov 2005, 21:17
|
#43
|
break it down!
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,087
|
Re: Opinions please
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kargool
No.. it wont. because when a target is below the scanners hit value he cant jpscan it.
|
you can jgp a targ if you send a def fleet. sending a def fleet and recalling it before it launches probably wouldn't be investigated Mr. Smartass.
|
|
|
26 Nov 2005, 12:05
|
#44
|
General (Adjective Army)
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Yorkshire, England.
Posts: 825
|
Re: Opinions please
I'm guessing that was intended to be the point - if defending out of alliance was hardcoded out of the game scanners would be rendered useless (except for unit scans).
__________________
Amnion (aka The Arcane Chas of Arcania) - Playing PA under those and other pseudonyms every genuine round since Round 2. Most recently (and insignificantly):
Onset of Apathy R94 | Stacks of Resources R95 | The Necromancer of Dol Guldur R96
70 Years of Queen Elizabeth R97 | Worst of The Worst R98
Knights of the Green Shield R99 | Look Out of The Window R100 | Most of All R102
Hard of Hearing (2:7:1) R103 | The Lateness of Your Application (1:6:6) R104 | Kinnison of Tellus (5:1:2) R105
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 20:28.
| |