value, xp, admins, fleets, winner, hate, agony, flaming

[isildurx]

I support PA teams decision.

[ArcChas]

Originally Posted by Fyodor

How do we draw the line between lemming runs and donating ships?.

Fleet names like "Value FTW" perhaps?

Not much room for doubt there.

[robban1]

Originally Posted by ArcChas

Fleet names like "Value FTW" perhaps?

Not much room for doubt there.

well if someone wants to have him closed for shipfarming thats kinda easy way to do it. ex, ppl founds out thats there is lemmings going on at rain's place and sends lots of fleets with names like that and report it and everything get recalled "cos shipfarming is illegal". so its so damn easy to inlfuense our dear stupid admins, its silly

[Marv]

Squishy made the right decision.

[Nadar]

Originally Posted by robban1

well if someone wants to have him closed for shipfarming thats kinda easy way to do it. ex, ppl founds out thats there is lemmings going on at rain's place and sends lots of fleets with names like that and report it and everything get recalled "cos shipfarming is illegal". so its so damn easy to inlfuense our dear stupid admins, its silly

Yeah, I'm sure people sent fleets at him just to get him closed

Get real kid.

[robban1]

Originally Posted by Nadar

Yeah, I'm sure people sent fleets at him just to get him closed

Get real kid.

well it works so how can you be so damn sure it wasnt the case here?

[Kal]

I'm just confused as to why the people with the fleets couldn;t have been closed if they were breaking the rules

[edit, i'm no longer confused, so ignore ]

[robban1]

Originally Posted by Kal

I'm just confused as to why the people with the fleets couldn;t have been closed if they were breaking the rules

[edit, i'm no longer confused, so ignore ]

well why is it still a gray area this stuff?

[Kal]

Originally Posted by robban1

well why is it still a gray area this stuff?

My understanding is that there was enough evidence for closing, but not enough time to hear appeals etc before the end of round, thus their fleets were recalled instead thus preventing their potenital cheating without loosing them score (as they would have lost score if they landed their fleets).

Ideally theese sort of acitons would never need to occur, but without paid 24hours per day admins who will definatly be around to hear appeals at any time sometimes actions such as theese have to occur.

[Squishy]

Originally Posted by kal

My understanding is that there was enough evidence for closing, but not enough time to hear appeals etc before the end of round, thus their fleets were recalled instead thus preventing their potenital cheating without loosing them score (as they would have lost score if they landed their fleets).

Ideally theese sort of acitons would never need to occur, but without paid 24hours per day admins who will definatly be around to hear appeals at any time sometimes actions such as theese have to occur.

Just to clarify things. If i had of closed those planets for cheating. The same result would have occured. They would have had fleets pulled from their target. Procedure dictates that all planets closed must have their cases heard on appeal. With the lack of time left in the round we could not justify making them lose out by being closed without an appeal having been heard when ranking took place. So i pulled the offending fleets and had no choice but to leave the planets open.

[robban1]

well its not good enough as the dude who actually got the first spot did land on friendly targets once or twice for a nice xp boast,
so whats the points with rules really?

atm its more the admins who controlls who win and loose and not the players who all are a bunch of cheaters more or less

[Banned]

Originally Posted by robban1

well its not good enough as the dude who actually got the first spot did land on friendly targets once or twice for a nice xp boast,

When did he do this?

We had some cases of friendly fire when we had people out of tag, but I don't recall JBG ever being involved in any.

[robban1]

Originally Posted by Banned

When did he do this?

We had some cases of friendly fire when we had people out of tag, but I don't recall JBG ever being involved in any.

sure

[JonnyBGood]

Originally Posted by robban1

well its not good enough as the dude who actually got the first spot did land on friendly targets once or twice for a nice xp boast

This is complete and utter cock. If you want I'll pm you my entire fleet command history for the round and you could confirm it with an admin or something (if you believe them ).

[robban1]

Originally Posted by JonnyBGood

This is complete and utter cock. If you want I'll pm you my entire fleet command history for the round and you could confirm it with an admin or something (if you believe them ).

nah doesnt matter as there is no way for anyone to keep track of everything

[Nadar]

robban1, your troll attempts suck balls.

[Tomkat]

robban1 is so full of shit.

This is the second thread I've heard him spouting completely unfounded rumours without any backup or evidence, just some ambiguous "well i know and you don't!" reasoning. Get off the forums, jackass.

[x-dANGEr]

To be honest, I tend not to agree to the decision. This was simply resulted by all 'value' players not wanting a XP-er to win the round, so they all wanted to suicide their ships on Rain, and what's wrong in that? It ain't against the rues in any way. It ain't considered ship farming, and it ain't cheating. You can simply say that the universe split into 2 alliances, value and XP, value ones wanted to sacrifice all they had to get one of them up in the rankings.. I honestly don't see what's wrong in this picture, but anyway. GG top 3 planets :P (Just so no one feels left out <3)

[Phil^]

they werent suiciding their fleets there, they were giving them to him.
its against the rules, covered as ship farming regardless of if you choose to believe that or not.

[Kal]

Originally Posted by x-dANGEr

To be honest, I tend not to agree to the decision. This was simply resulted by all 'value' players not wanting a XP-er to win the round, so they all wanted to suicide their ships on Rain, and what's wrong in that? It ain't against the rues in any way. It ain't considered ship farming, and it ain't cheating. You can simply say that the universe split into 2 alliances, value and XP, value ones wanted to sacrifice all they had to get one of them up in the rankings.. I honestly don't see what's wrong in this picture, but anyway. GG top 3 planets :P (Just so no one feels left out <3)

actually I think that technically violates the eula - the rule about actions that only benefit a planet/galaxy/alliance other than your own.

i.e. if you suicide on someone with the intention of boosting their score you break the eula regardless of your motivation.

[robban1]

so lemmings isnt allowed by the rules?

[Phil^]

Originally Posted by robban1

so lemmings isnt allowed by the rules?

donating fleets to be stolen so that someone can reach #1 is against the rules, Surely you arent so dense as to not realise that?
I do hope , that you are just pretending to not understand this rather simple truth

[Treveler]

So attacking the biggest planet is illegal? When is it donating and when is it just a normal attack?

And what rules did they break?

[Nadar]

Originally Posted by Treveler

So attacking the biggest planet is illegal? When is it donating and when is it just a normal attack?

And what rules did they break?

I think you'll have to be a moron not to spot obvious fleet donations.

[Treveler]

Originally Posted by Nadar

I think you'll have to be a moron not to spot obvious fleet donations.

I think you must be a moron for pointing out something obvious.

[lokken]

well if its obvious, then its a fleet donation.

is it really that difficult?

[Treveler]

Well I just want to see what they see as obvious. I also want to see where it is stated in the rules that it is illegal to attack the biggest valued player for some end of round fun.

[gzambo]

quit whining it was obviously ship farming the fleet names give it away ,
if he went from 10th to 2nd he obviously knew about it,

but as always in pa when ppl lose they whinge glad to see some things dont change

[Nadar]

Originally Posted by Treveler

I think you must be a moron for pointing out something obvious.

Morons needs to be pointed in obvious directions.

[furball]

Originally Posted by Treveler

Well I just want to see what they see as obvious. I also want to see where it is stated in the rules that it is illegal to attack the biggest valued player for some end of round fun.

If you can't be bothered to read, please don't bother to post. I've already posted what rules exist and how they apply. Quite why you persist in posting when most respected posters have already satisfied themselves that you donated your fleet to rain is beyond me.

Originally Posted by furball

18.1. Farming:
Farming is illegal. The definitions of farming are, but are not limited to:
(a) Attacking a target with his/her consent to get his/her asteroids/ships
(b) Defending against someone who is attacking with their consent to steal
their ships.
(c) Abusing game features in order to gain excessive XP (e.g. roid farming)
(d) Doing either a, b or c by using multi-planets


You could tentatively suggest that donating ships to 9:2:9 is some form of reverse farming, but it doesn't really fit within the rule either. As always, there's section 18.6(c) to fall back on:


18.6. Miscellaneous cheating
[...]
(c) As newer methods of cheating are discovered, you authorise us to interpret
all data logged about your account towards detecting these methods. Actions which
are deemed to be cheating are not restricted to the list given on this
EULA and may be added to at any time, and you authorise us to do so.

http://pirate.planetarion.com/showth...49#post3008649

[lokken]

PA team's interests are to protect the integrity of the rankings, because that's the business of their game. They'll do everything to protect it, and rightly so, they have a discretionary rule to make sure they can do this and if you fall foul of it, well you should never try to intentionaly sail the line and get a reaction in the first place.

There are situations in planetarion where an action may or might not be against the rules. Support is an example of this. I could roid with a mate, untagged once a day. But I don't, because I could be closed for support. I asked Appoco about it - he said that while it would probably come to nothing as long as it wasn't too regular, I was always taking a risk. So I opted not to take that risk. From another thread you've openly accepted that you did take some kind of a risk, so it's your lookout. If it's dodgy, don't do it.

What I do agree with you on (and i'm implying this from your posting), is that the rules need to be a lot clearer. No idea who is responsible for drafting them, or infact whether they employ a lawyer to do it, but I'd say there are plenty of law students in this game who could do a better job. It's partly why i'm against the support planets rule, as no definition as to what support could be could ever be clear without gauging opinion of the multihunter, which is a waste of my time and theirs.

[Treveler]

I dont care much about who is respected or not and I dont see anything there about it being illegal to attack the biggest valued player for some end of round fun (like newbies has been doing since r1).

I want to know if it will be illegal to attack the #1 planet (val rank) the last day of next round as that seems to be implemented through section 18.6c if I understand it correctly.

[furball]

Originally Posted by gzambo

quit whining it was obviously ship farming the fleet names give it away ,
if he went from 10th to 2nd he obviously knew about it,

This isn't true. I don't hold rain himself culpable for the events of the final week - he was an innocent party. People like Kila decided to donate their fleets to him, for example.

In the final week of the round people always crash their fleets for roids and XP. Personally I suicided 1200 FR on the final day for 535 roids at max XP (700 roids without the piggy ), and got over 500k score out of it. This isn't anything new. The consequence of this is that many big Ziks grow a lot in value from stolen ships when defending themselves and others.

rain also had a lot of roids and a lot of saved resources. Spending these at the end gave him a major boost. Again, this isn't anything new.

Originally Posted by gzambo

but as always in pa when ppl lose they whinge glad to see some things dont change

This will never change. Sometimes they are right. Sometimes they are not. Sometimes I would like to strike certain posters from the face of the earth. Sadly giving them red blobs will have to do.

[Treveler]

Originally Posted by lokken

PA team's interests are to protect the integrity of the rankings, because that's the business of their game. They'll do everything to protect it, and rightly so, they have a discretionary rule to make sure they can do this and if you fall foul of it, well you should never try to intentionaly sail the line and get a reaction in the first place.

There are situations in planetarion where an action may or might not be against the rules. Support is an example of this. I could roid with a mate, untagged once a day. But I don't, because I could be closed for support. I asked Appoco about it - he said that while it would probably come to nothing as long as it wasn't too regular, I was always taking a risk. So I opted not to take that risk. From another thread you've openly accepted that you did take some kind of a risk, so it's your lookout. If it's dodgy, don't do it.

What I do agree with you on (and i'm implying this from your posting), is that the rules need to be a lot clearer. No idea who is responsible for drafting them, or infact whether they employ a lawyer to do it, but I'd say there are plenty of law students in this game who could do a better job. It's partly why i'm against the support planets rule, as no definition as to what support could be could ever be clear without gauging opinion of the multihunter, which is a waste of my time and theirs.

Any rule that mainly depends on the opinion of the MH is bad. If they keep this up they can just as well make a rule that states: "Its illegal to cheat" and then its up to each individual MH to decide what cheating is.

Edit: The post you replied to was my reply to furball`s post. It got a bit mixed up because I didnt use quotes.

[furball]

Originally Posted by Treveler

I dont care much about who is respected or not and I dont see anything there about it being illegal to attack the biggest valued player for some end of round fun (like newbies has been doing since r1).

I want to know if it will be illegal to attack the #1 planet (val rank) the last day of next round as that seems to be implemented through section 18.6c if I understand it correctly.

No, it's not.

What could potentially be illegal is attacking a Zik player challenging for the #1 rank with a fleet that has little to no chance of getting the planet in question an increase in score. Kila's suicides are the best example of this.

If you then admit it on the forums, you should at least win the internet version of a Darwin Award. Examples of this can be found in this thread, handily pointed out by lokken here. OH WAIT A SECOND. That was you.

[lokken]

I generally agree, but I feel 18.6(c) is a vital provision and should stay in the rules, because it gives an added layer of protection. Here I feel that while there may have been no specific rule, such an action was against the spirit of the rules and thus, the discretion was used correctly. What should happen is that we need situations such as this being written in.

[Treveler]

Originally Posted by furball

No, it's not.

What could potentially be illegal is attacking a Zik player challenging for the #1 rank with a fleet that has little to no chance of getting the planet in question an increase in score. Kila's suicides are the best example of this.

If you then admit it on the forums, you should at least win the internet version of a Darwin Award. Examples of this can be found in this thread, handily pointed out by lokken here. OH WAIT A SECOND. That was you.

If you are to stupid to understand why I did that then please refrain from replying to my posts in the future. I don’t care much for idiots.

[lokken]

The point I tried to make, is that whatever your motivation, you came across a certain way and shot yourself in the foot as you were making yourself out to be potentially cheating in a manner which couldn't be interpreted any other way. From then on, you were just digging yourself a deeper hole. Either you'ld successfully pulled off an all-out mockery of the rules or you'ld just got yourself deleted by posting a bit on PD. The point i've made earlier in this thread is that if you mock the rules you take a risk.

Had you said nothing, you'ld have been just another suicider and nothing would have come it.

[Treveler]

Originally Posted by lokken

I generally agree, but I feel 18.6(c) is a vital provision and should stay in the rules, because it gives an added layer of protection. Here I feel that while there may have been no specific rule, such an action was against the spirit of the rules and thus, the discretion was used correctly. What should happen is that we need situations such as this being written in.

I agree that it is against the spirit if the rules if the motivation behind the attack was to donate the fleet. But rules like this cant divide between motivations behind players decisions and therefore I think such rules do more harm then good.

Imo its okey for newbies to bash their fleet for fun but its not okey to knowingly donate fleets in an attempt to alter the rankings. The result is the same though.

[lokken]

Originally Posted by Treveler

I agree that it is against the spirit if the rules if the motivation behind the attack was to dontate the fleet. But rules like this cant devide between motivations behind players decitions and therefor I think such rules do more harm then good.

Imo its okey for newbies to bash their fleet for fun but its not okey to knowingly donate fleets in an attempt to alter the rankings. The result is the same though.

While I generally think there should be little discretion for MH, I disagree for that rule, as quite simply it also covers things no one has thought of until they've been done.

It's just a useful tool for emergencies. While we have to put a bit of trust in the MH, the fact they used it properly on this occasion suggests it's not too much of a problem for now.

[robban1]

well a conclution of it is possibly that dont attack a zik and its all clear

[Treveler]

Originally Posted by lokken

The point I tried to make, is that whatever your motivation, you came across a certain way and shot yourself in the foot as you were making yourself out to be potentially cheating in a manner which couldn't be interpreted any other way. From then on, you were just digging yourself a deeper hole. Either you'ld successfully pulled off an all-out mockery of the rules or you'ld just got yourself deleted by posting a bit on PD. The point i've made earlier in this thread is that if you mock the rules you take a risk.

Had you said nothing, you'ld have been just another suicider and nothing would have come it.

Well my main motivation was to show how stupid it is to have steal ships in a game were balanced stats means everything but thats another story!

[lokken]

because it's bastard hard to attack with them and get big in the first place to get into the position the likes of rain were in.

[bwtmc]

Originally Posted by Treveler

Well my main motivation was to show how stupid it is to have steal ships in a game were balanced stats means everything but thats another story!

It's interesting to note that your main motivation for the attack was to donate ships to the winner.

I thought the whole point of all your other posts was that you were having fun looking for a good battle report and not trying to assist 9:2:9.

[robban1]

Originally Posted by bwtmc

It's interesting to note that your main motivation for the attack was to donate ships to the winner.

I thought the whole point of all your other posts was that you were having fun looking for a good battle report and not trying to assist 9:2:9.

well i think you attacked rain to swap ships for roids and xp so whats the diffrents here?

[Treveler]

Originally Posted by bwtmc

It's interesting to note that your main motivation for the attack was to donate ships to the winner.

I thought the whole point of all your other posts was that you were having fun looking for a good battle report and not trying to assist 9:2:9.

I was having fun looking at the BRs and I did not try to assist 9:2:9. I tried, as stated in the post you quoted, to show how stupid it is with steal ships in a game like this.

Do you want me to repeat myself one more time?

[Mystical]

Originally Posted by Treveler

I dont care much about who is respected or not and I dont see anything there about it being illegal to attack the biggest valued player for some end of round fun (like newbies has been doing since r1).

I want to know if it will be illegal to attack the #1 planet (val rank) the last day of next round as that seems to be implemented through section 18.6c if I understand it correctly.

Fool. You are supposed to have a LITTLE brain with your history. Everybody can understand that is not illegal, unless it happens in an illegal way, as is the case here. And before you ask: What is an illegal way? (plain forum spamming), the answer shall be: When it influences the rankings (or better even, score boost) in such a big way, it should be illegal. And especially when you know Either the attackers, or the defenders, or both are doing it for the cause of helping one planet. You can see this in simply calcing stuff out. It is really simple. Ie: all depends on the situation and it can't have a hard rule for it.

(Obviously, pa-team, getting stealing away will get rid of at least 50% of the current cheating in pa probably..)

[Wishmaster]

Originally Posted by Mystical

(Obviously, pa-team, getting stealing away will get rid of at least 50% of the current cheating in pa probably..)

And 50% of the players....

Atleast alot will leave for good if they remove the only fun feature in PA.

[Phil^]

Originally Posted by robban1

well i think you attacked rain to swap ships for roids and xp so whats the diffrents here?

some days, i honestly dont know why people post such retarded things.

THE DIFFERENCE, MISTER " ITS NOT CHEATING, ITS HELPING A FRIEND" IS THAT SWAPPING SHIPS FOR ROIDS+XP DIRECTLY BENEFITS YOUR OWN PLANET WHEN CALCULATED RIGHT, DUMPING ALL YOUR SHIPS ON SOMEONE SO THEY CAN STEAL THEM DOES NOT HELP YOUR OWN PLANET BUT SURE AS HELL LETS THE PERSON GAIN RANKS FROM THE SHIPS YOU DONATED TO THEM.
and dont you dare suggest that its a "good thing" to donate ships, your credibility is already stretched

Jesus, whats wrong with the intelligence of some people

[Squishy]

Originally Posted by treveler

I want to know if it will be illegal to attack the #1 planet (val rank) the last day of next round as that seems to be implemented through section 18.6c if I understand it correctly.

No but say attacking him and splitting your fleet up for max ship cap, one of the fleets not even having pods and being totaly stolen. That would probebly constatute a donation. Woudnt you think?