User Name
Password

Go Back   Planetarion Forums > Planetarion Related Forums > Planetarion Discussions

Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes
Unread 15 Dec 2006, 01:48   #51
Red-
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 204
Red- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these parts
Re: Have Multihunters lost the plot??

Said rain who was one of many who donated ships to Smasher during Havoc of r19 and cheated like a bastard.

Next time try and make it less obvious ffs - Landing 20k termites on his galm8 for him to steal was just too obvisous. Or well it was for everyone but multihunters it seems.
__________________
Back from the unknown
Red- is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 15 Dec 2006, 02:10   #52
Benneh
Non directed and witty
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: #ascendancy
Posts: 814
Benneh is a pillar of this Internet societyBenneh is a pillar of this Internet societyBenneh is a pillar of this Internet societyBenneh is a pillar of this Internet societyBenneh is a pillar of this Internet societyBenneh is a pillar of this Internet societyBenneh is a pillar of this Internet societyBenneh is a pillar of this Internet societyBenneh is a pillar of this Internet societyBenneh is a pillar of this Internet societyBenneh is a pillar of this Internet society
Re: Have Multihunters lost the plot??

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red-
Said rain who was one of many who donated ships to Smasher during Havoc of r19 and cheated like a bastard.

Next time try and make it less obvious ffs - Landing 20k termites on his galm8 for him to steal was just too obvisous. Or well it was for everyone but multihunters it seems.
Seriously WHO THE **** CARES ABOUT HAVOC!

Just because he has/is outfarming you. Oh no i wont get that #1 planet rank in havoc. OH NO.
__________________
CATHAAAAAARGH
I've won 4 rounds.
I'm kinda a big deal.
Benneh is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 15 Dec 2006, 02:11   #53
Red-
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 204
Red- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these parts
Re: Have Multihunters lost the plot??

Well the point prolly was that a lot of people got closed for having 1-2 fleets suicide on them and Smasher farmed fleets all along big style and nothing happend.
__________________
Back from the unknown
Red- is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 15 Dec 2006, 12:32   #54
ArcChas
General (Adjective Army)
 
ArcChas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Yorkshire, England.
Posts: 825
ArcChas has much to be proud ofArcChas has much to be proud ofArcChas has much to be proud ofArcChas has much to be proud ofArcChas has much to be proud ofArcChas has much to be proud ofArcChas has much to be proud ofArcChas has much to be proud of
Re: Have Multihunters lost the plot??

Quote:
Originally Posted by Heartless
But why should the merge be considered as cheating? It's just doing what the game allows me to do. If you consider 4 alliances merging into a cheat, then you have to reconsider the whole merging feature as by pure definition a merger of two alliances would be cheating already.
I see it this way. Four alliances merging wouldn't be considered cheating.

The cheating part (or attempting to gain an unfair advantage) is in deliberately splitting one alliance into four pieces with the intention of merging in the future.
__________________
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
ArcChas is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 15 Dec 2006, 12:54   #55
Thrackan
NewDawn peon
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dutchieland
Posts: 18
Thrackan is a glorious beacon of lightThrackan is a glorious beacon of lightThrackan is a glorious beacon of lightThrackan is a glorious beacon of lightThrackan is a glorious beacon of light
Re: Have Multihunters lost the plot??

What a load of babble...

Planetarion players can be glad they have a LIVING anti-cheat system, and not one that auto-closes you based on IP or Proxy.
You are allowed, advised and encouraged to file any exceptions in #multihunters.

It takes like 5 minutes to let someone check if you are the only one playing in the office or not. Filing for the use of a proxy can be done as well, your case will be reviewed and soon you will know the answer, accompanied by arguments.

First and most of all, it is up to YOU as a PLAYER to prevent yourself from being closed. YOU agree to the rules, YOU take care of stuff! You break them, then MH shut you down, unless you pre-provide a reason and it gets accepted.

I say, go Multi Hunters and Huntresses! And if I ever actually NEED an exception, you'll see me on IRC...
Thrackan is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 15 Dec 2006, 14:32   #56
Heartless
CRASHING BEATS 'N FANTASY
 
Heartless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Cold Country.
Posts: 1,912
Heartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like him
Re: Have Multihunters lost the plot??

Quote:
Originally Posted by ArcChas
I see it this way. Four alliances merging wouldn't be considered cheating.

The cheating part (or attempting to gain an unfair advantage) is in deliberately splitting one alliance into four pieces with the intention of merging in the future.
Yeah, and why is that cheating?
__________________
Ią! Ią! Munin F'tagn! - [*scendancy]
Heartless is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 15 Dec 2006, 14:42   #57
aNgRyDuCk
Hired Thug
 
aNgRyDuCk's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Central Illinois USA
Posts: 894
aNgRyDuCk is a pillar of this Internet societyaNgRyDuCk is a pillar of this Internet societyaNgRyDuCk is a pillar of this Internet societyaNgRyDuCk is a pillar of this Internet societyaNgRyDuCk is a pillar of this Internet societyaNgRyDuCk is a pillar of this Internet societyaNgRyDuCk is a pillar of this Internet societyaNgRyDuCk is a pillar of this Internet societyaNgRyDuCk is a pillar of this Internet societyaNgRyDuCk is a pillar of this Internet societyaNgRyDuCk is a pillar of this Internet society
Re: Have Multihunters lost the plot??

Quote:
Originally Posted by Heartless
Yeah, and why is that cheating?
it's not...it's strategy... until a rule exists that makes it illegal
__________________
Anatidaephobia is the fear that somewhere in the world, there is a duck watching you......
aNgRyDuCk is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 15 Dec 2006, 14:42   #58
ArcChas
General (Adjective Army)
 
ArcChas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Yorkshire, England.
Posts: 825
ArcChas has much to be proud ofArcChas has much to be proud ofArcChas has much to be proud ofArcChas has much to be proud ofArcChas has much to be proud ofArcChas has much to be proud ofArcChas has much to be proud ofArcChas has much to be proud of
Re: Have Multihunters lost the plot??

Because it's a deliberate attempt to get around the rules relating to the composition and size of alliances?

Ask yourself what the reason is for splitting into four in the first place. If there was no benefit then there would be no point in it. If there is a benefit then it's an attempt to obtain an "unfair advantage."
__________________
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
ArcChas is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 15 Dec 2006, 14:45   #59
aNgRyDuCk
Hired Thug
 
aNgRyDuCk's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Central Illinois USA
Posts: 894
aNgRyDuCk is a pillar of this Internet societyaNgRyDuCk is a pillar of this Internet societyaNgRyDuCk is a pillar of this Internet societyaNgRyDuCk is a pillar of this Internet societyaNgRyDuCk is a pillar of this Internet societyaNgRyDuCk is a pillar of this Internet societyaNgRyDuCk is a pillar of this Internet societyaNgRyDuCk is a pillar of this Internet societyaNgRyDuCk is a pillar of this Internet societyaNgRyDuCk is a pillar of this Internet societyaNgRyDuCk is a pillar of this Internet society
Re: Have Multihunters lost the plot??

Quote:
Originally Posted by ArcChas
Because it's a deliberate attempt to get around the rules relating to the composition and size of alliances?

Ask yourself what the reason is for splitting into four in the first place. If there was no benefit then there would be no point in it. If there is a benefit then it's an attempt to obtain an "unfair advantage."
it's not an unfair advantage. It's a strategic attempt to mask actual strenght of the alliance, based on the game mechanics

edit: spelling
__________________
Anatidaephobia is the fear that somewhere in the world, there is a duck watching you......
aNgRyDuCk is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 15 Dec 2006, 14:58   #60
ArcChas
General (Adjective Army)
 
ArcChas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Yorkshire, England.
Posts: 825
ArcChas has much to be proud ofArcChas has much to be proud ofArcChas has much to be proud ofArcChas has much to be proud ofArcChas has much to be proud ofArcChas has much to be proud ofArcChas has much to be proud ofArcChas has much to be proud of
Re: Have Multihunters lost the plot??

Well, that's a matter of interpretation. I can't remember the exact wording but I'm sure that one definition of cheating has been given (in the rules or EULA) as any attempt to utilise "loopholes" in the rules and another was not acting in the spirit of the rules.

I do remember a round in which one alliance told its members not to join until (very) late in the round. There was some argument afterwards as to whether that was fair or not (I express no opinion on that one). This is a further step down that path and one which (I believe) actually contravenes the "spirit of the rules".

Your mileage may (and obviously does) vary.
__________________
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
ArcChas is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 15 Dec 2006, 15:04   #61
Heartless
CRASHING BEATS 'N FANTASY
 
Heartless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Cold Country.
Posts: 1,912
Heartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like him
Re: Have Multihunters lost the plot??

Quote:
Originally Posted by ArcChas
Because it's a deliberate attempt to get around the rules relating to the composition and size of alliances?

Ask yourself what the reason is for splitting into four in the first place. If there was no benefit then there would be no point in it. If there is a benefit then it's an attempt to obtain an "unfair advantage."
I disagree with you here. It would be such an attempt if the alliance in question would actually exceed the maximum member count - which they do not. If instead they would just hide all their members out of tag and form their tag in the very least tick, it would be very much the same (you referred to such an event in your other post). It was not deemed cheating then, even though some people considered it as that because it was an "unfair" benefit for the alliance in question. But then again, everytime you outsmart someone has to be declared as "unfair", too. Life simply ain't fair, and war ain't fair at all.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ArcChas
Well, that's a matter of interpretation. I can't remember the exact wording but I'm sure that one definition of cheating has been given (in the rules or EULA) as any attempt to utilise "loopholes" in the rules and another was not acting in the spirit of the rules.

I do remember a round in which one alliance told its members not to join until (very) late in the round. There was some argument afterwards as to whether that was fair or not (I express no opinion on that one). This is a further step down that path and one which (I believe) actually contravenes the "spirit of the rules".

Your mileage may (and obviously does) vary.
Why is it a loophole? You talk about it like it would be obvious. The question is then: a) Why did PA Team open up that loophole? and b) why did they _not_ introduce such a rule in the eula after making the feature available? To me it looks very much like someone talked out of it's arse when declaring this form of divide-and-conquer as "cheating".
__________________
Ią! Ią! Munin F'tagn! - [*scendancy]
Heartless is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 15 Dec 2006, 15:07   #62
aNgRyDuCk
Hired Thug
 
aNgRyDuCk's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Central Illinois USA
Posts: 894
aNgRyDuCk is a pillar of this Internet societyaNgRyDuCk is a pillar of this Internet societyaNgRyDuCk is a pillar of this Internet societyaNgRyDuCk is a pillar of this Internet societyaNgRyDuCk is a pillar of this Internet societyaNgRyDuCk is a pillar of this Internet societyaNgRyDuCk is a pillar of this Internet societyaNgRyDuCk is a pillar of this Internet societyaNgRyDuCk is a pillar of this Internet societyaNgRyDuCk is a pillar of this Internet societyaNgRyDuCk is a pillar of this Internet society
Re: Have Multihunters lost the plot??

Quote:
Originally Posted by Heartless
Why is it a loophole? You talk about it like it would be obvious. The question is then: a) Why did PA Team open up that loophole? and b) why did they _not_ introduce such a rule in the eula after making the feature available? To me it looks very much like someone talked out of it's arse when declaring this form of divide-and-conquer as "cheating".
another question is, why didn't they close the "loophole"?
__________________
Anatidaephobia is the fear that somewhere in the world, there is a duck watching you......
aNgRyDuCk is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 15 Dec 2006, 15:10   #63
Furyous
Registered User
 
Furyous's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: England
Posts: 258
Furyous is a splendid one to beholdFuryous is a splendid one to beholdFuryous is a splendid one to beholdFuryous is a splendid one to beholdFuryous is a splendid one to beholdFuryous is a splendid one to beholdFuryous is a splendid one to beholdFuryous is a splendid one to behold
Re: Have Multihunters lost the plot??

The price of having your members split up or not in the alliance until the end is that you don't get a -1 eta defence advantage. If that is a price you think is worth paying because of the advantages of not showing your strenght publically then there is nothing wrong or 'against the spirit of the game' about it.

Alliances have their intel operations anyway. It is up to them to work out how strong you are, not the Universe screen.
__________________
You ain't seen me, right!
Furyous is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 15 Dec 2006, 15:12   #64
karl_tommy
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Have Multihunters lost the plot??

maby they have, i want to pay money to join in to, but how do i do that in this site?
  Reply With Quote
Unread 15 Dec 2006, 16:08   #65
ArcChas
General (Adjective Army)
 
ArcChas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Yorkshire, England.
Posts: 825
ArcChas has much to be proud ofArcChas has much to be proud ofArcChas has much to be proud ofArcChas has much to be proud ofArcChas has much to be proud ofArcChas has much to be proud ofArcChas has much to be proud ofArcChas has much to be proud of
Re: Have Multihunters lost the plot??

Quote:
Originally Posted by Heartless
everytime you outsmart someone has to be declared as "unfair", too. Life simply ain't fair, and war ain't fair at all.
Agreed - without reservation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heartless
Why is it a loophole? You talk about it like it would be obvious.
Because it allows one alliance to act as four separate ones and then transfer all members into the main alliance without the usual "vulnerable" period suffered by other people switching alliances?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heartless
The question is then: a) Why did PA Team open up that loophole? and b) why did they _not_ introduce such a rule in the eula after making the feature available? To me it looks very much like someone talked out of it's arse when declaring this form of divide-and-conquer as "cheating".
I think it's more a case of "unintended consequences". The merge facility was introduced to allow small (and possibly ineffectual) alliances to join forces. The possibility of large alliances using it to hide their true strength never occurred to PA Team.

Quote:
Originally Posted by aNgRyDuCk
another question is, why didn't they close the "loophole"?
Who knows? They'll have to answer that for themselves.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Furyous
The price of having your members split up or not in the alliance until the end is that you don't get a -1 eta defence advantage. If that is a price you think is worth paying because of the advantages of not showing your strenght publically then there is nothing wrong or 'against the spirit of the game' about it.
Unless you consider it an extension of the "support planet" rules. There are similarities and the temptation for the four parts of the alliance to interact would be very hard to resist.

As I've said, it's really a matter of interpretation - and the people that have to make such judgements are the PA Team and the Multi-Hunters.

I'm really glad I don't have their job.
__________________
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
ArcChas is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 15 Dec 2006, 19:09   #66
JonnyBGood
Banned
 
JonnyBGood's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Further to the right
Posts: 19,441
JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: Have Multihunters lost the plot??

I think it would be most accurate to say that there exists a certain feeling among some PA players that a general rule against bad things being allowed to happen is the way forward.
__________________
Some might ask what good is life without purpose but I'm anticipating a good lunch.
JonnyBGood is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 15 Dec 2006, 21:08   #67
Heartless
CRASHING BEATS 'N FANTASY
 
Heartless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Cold Country.
Posts: 1,912
Heartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like him
Re: Have Multihunters lost the plot??

Actually I had a talk with a multihunter earlier today. The conclusion of that talk was:

It is not cheating if an alliance splits up into multiple smaller parts...
... BUT the OOGOOA rule still applies - effectively meaning that too much defense and stuff between that alliance fragments means planets will get closed for that.
__________________
Ią! Ią! Munin F'tagn! - [*scendancy]
Heartless is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 16 Dec 2006, 02:42   #68
Fiery
PA Team
 
Fiery's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 904
Fiery has much to be proud ofFiery has much to be proud ofFiery has much to be proud ofFiery has much to be proud ofFiery has much to be proud ofFiery has much to be proud ofFiery has much to be proud ofFiery has much to be proud ofFiery has much to be proud ofFiery has much to be proud of
Re: Have Multihunters lost the plot??

I forgot to post on here like I said I would. Thank you for the reminder, Heartless.
In regards to an alliance having 4-5 smaller alliances or, using Heartless's term, a fragmented alliance. This is legal by the EULA. If your alliance wants to hide it's true numbers, that is fine and dandy because it does not give an alliance an unfair advantage. I look at it as 4-5 separate alliances. However, if there is interaction between the 4-5 alliance fragments, like deffing each other when it is OOGOOA, that is not fine and dandy and you can expect an invite to #multihunters to explain yourself.
If anyone has any further questions in regards to fragmented alliances, feel free to pm me on IRC.
Fiery is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 16 Dec 2006, 03:35   #69
robban1
Registered User
 
robban1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 846
robban1 is infamous around these partsrobban1 is infamous around these partsrobban1 is infamous around these partsrobban1 is infamous around these partsrobban1 is infamous around these partsrobban1 is infamous around these parts
Re: Have Multihunters lost the plot??

oogooa hehe that just looks weird with 2k players it cant be that hard to keep track of them i guess
robban1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 16 Dec 2006, 04:20   #70
Furyous
Registered User
 
Furyous's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: England
Posts: 258
Furyous is a splendid one to beholdFuryous is a splendid one to beholdFuryous is a splendid one to beholdFuryous is a splendid one to beholdFuryous is a splendid one to beholdFuryous is a splendid one to beholdFuryous is a splendid one to beholdFuryous is a splendid one to behold
Re: Have Multihunters lost the plot??

Quote:
Originally Posted by JonnyBGood
I think it would be most accurate to say that there exists a certain feeling among some PA players that a general rule against bad things being allowed to happen is the way forward.
Now that's classic!
__________________
You ain't seen me, right!
Furyous is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 16 Dec 2006, 12:02   #71
Judge
Doh!
 
Judge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit
Posts: 1,720
Judge is infamous around these parts
Re: Have Multihunters lost the plot??

To answer the initial question.

I would say no they have not, there was one incident in my galaxy during R19 that did result in a planet being closed, that being that one "gal mate" thought it a good idea to get a player who was quitting to "donate" a fleet to an unwitting participant, and then announcing the fact of it in the galaxy channel when it was eta 4.

This resulted in the poor unwitting player having his planet closed some 6 ticks later.

I discussed at length the issue with Fiery as did the poor sod who was closed. Fortunately the matter was resolved as it became apparent from IRC logs both from the channel and his alliance defence officers that there was no awareness of the issue untill it was beyond the point of no return.

During havoc however the same planet was closed, as his alliance HC decided a fleet donation of 5000 harpy and 500 Dragons would be a good boost to his havoc chances.


The impression that "anything goes" in havoc was soon thwarted when after only 6 hours of Havoc play his round ended.
Judge is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 16 Dec 2006, 16:24   #72
furball
Registered Awesome Person
 
furball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,676
furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: Have Multihunters lost the plot??

Here's a question - would any of these scenarios be illegal?

Scenario 1:


I'm HC of Alliance A, an established and well known alliance, and I've decided that I want to block pre-round as I believe (rightly or wrongly) that my alliance's success will be greatest if I go into the round with allies.

I block with Alliances B and C, two other established and well-known alliances. We share buddypacks as much as we can and set up cluster defence channels for the block to ensure fast in-cluster defence. We have a communal general defence channel where everyone sends defence to everyone else: members give DCs both their available ships and their tag for -1 alliance ETA.

When we attack, we attack as a block. By doing this, we get better target coverage and help members with more eclectic fleets to get appropriate targets. It doesn't matter what tag a player is in - the block acts as one whenever possible.

When the round ends, each tag takes its own place and we laugh and joke about wherever each alliance came in the end.


Scenario 2:

All of the same, with one exception. With a week to go, we merged the highest value players from each alliance into a single tag. This gave us the number 1 spot by a considerable margin, whereas individually we weren't close to it before.


Scenario 3:

As Scenario 2, except we'd agreed to do it pre-round anyway, no matter how the rankings were looking.
__________________
Finally free!
furball is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 16 Dec 2006, 16:32   #73
Phil^
Insomniac
 
Phil^'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 3,583
Phil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus would
Re: Have Multihunters lost the plot??

Scenario 1 - Yes it would be banned. OOGOOA rule prevents the shared defences between the alliances, blocked or not.
The attacking together is fine though

Scenario 2 - Iffy but i would be leaning towards yes if this was the plan from the start, The three 'established' alliance tags serve to provide a single alliance at the end with a means to bypass the alliance limit and cherry pick the best of the members.

Scenario 3 - Definate yes. See reasons above
__________________
Phil^

Last edited by Phil^; 16 Dec 2006 at 16:34. Reason: Misread post
Phil^ is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 16 Dec 2006, 17:05   #74
furball
Registered Awesome Person
 
furball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,676
furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: Have Multihunters lost the plot??

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil^
Scenario 1 - Yes it would be banned. OOGOOA rule prevents the shared defences between the alliances, blocked or not.
The attacking together is fine though

Scenario 2 - Iffy but i would be leaning towards yes if this was the plan from the start, The three 'established' alliance tags serve to provide a single alliance at the end with a means to bypass the alliance limit and cherry pick the best of the members.

Scenario 3 - Definate yes. See reasons above
Of course, I would prefer a current MH to reply. But anyway.


Quote:
Originally Posted by EULA
(f) Support Accounts are accounts which are dedicated to undertaking specific
and repeated actions which result in an unfair benefit for a
planet/organisation, where an organisation is defined as an alliance or galaxy.
But the account isn't dedicated towards undertaking a specific and related action (e.g. building a single defence ship for an alliance, e.g. R15 Vipers) for either of the two other blocked alliances. It's just not happening. Stop trying to brute-force the support planet rule into doing things that it simply doesn't cover.

If PA wants to ban blocking, it can. However, that's never been stated by anyone in PA Team in an official capacity. I don't have a problem with Scenario 3 being banned, but Scenarios 1 & 2 should be legal. Alliances should be free to work together however they choose to - whether it's just helping each other defend fleet-catches, or working together in close co-operation.
__________________
Finally free!
furball is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 16 Dec 2006, 17:15   #75
Phil^
Insomniac
 
Phil^'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 3,583
Phil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus would
Re: Have Multihunters lost the plot??

Im sorry, i was under the impression that defences from one alliance into another is covered as being
a) Specific , A defence is a very specific action after all.
b) repeated , Defences are not going to get you closed if they are a one off action. With a shared defence channel you can bet they will be repeated.
c) unfairly benefits an organisation defined as the other alliance rather then the one you belong to. After all if you were actually part of that alliance you should be in its tag.

Perhaps you missed that rather subtle point of logic in the holier then thou rant.

Its not about banning blocking - If that were the case then shared alliance attacks would be banned as well.
__________________
Phil^

Last edited by Phil^; 16 Dec 2006 at 17:22. Reason: God im cranky today :/
Phil^ is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 16 Dec 2006, 20:07   #76
_Kila_
break it down!
 
_Kila_'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,087
_Kila_ is a pillar of this Internet society_Kila_ is a pillar of this Internet society_Kila_ is a pillar of this Internet society_Kila_ is a pillar of this Internet society_Kila_ is a pillar of this Internet society_Kila_ is a pillar of this Internet society_Kila_ is a pillar of this Internet society_Kila_ is a pillar of this Internet society_Kila_ is a pillar of this Internet society_Kila_ is a pillar of this Internet society_Kila_ is a pillar of this Internet society
Re: Have Multihunters lost the plot??

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red-
Said rain who was one of many who donated ships to Smasher during Havoc of r19 and cheated like a bastard.

Next time try and make it less obvious ffs - Landing 20k termites on his galm8 for him to steal was just too obvisous. Or well it was for everyone but multihunters it seems.
I HAVE COME TO CONFESS TO THE HOLY LIGHT!
Some guy hit me with beetles/thief on the last day of havoc and I had lots of res (150m each) could have covered with cutlass, but I only built a few cutlass and built a lot of thieves cause I didn't have a scan and thought it would be Fi, I got a scan a couple of ticks too late, and couldn't be bothered to cancel the order and waste res! he ended up nicking ~2 mil value.
FATHER FORGIVE ME FOR I HAVE SINNED!

Last edited by _Kila_; 16 Dec 2006 at 20:13.
_Kila_ is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 16 Dec 2006, 23:00   #77
furball
Registered Awesome Person
 
furball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,676
furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: Have Multihunters lost the plot??

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil^
c) unfairly benefits an organisation defined as the other alliance rather then the one you belong to. After all if you were actually part of that alliance you should be in its tag.
Is blocking automatically unfair? Perhaps not, thinking back to some of the blocks pre-PAX.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil^
Perhaps you missed that rather subtle point of logic in the holier then thou rant.
Perhaps you missed the word 'dedicated'.

Yes, the account does undertake these actions. But it's not dedicated towards doing so, it's dedicated towards helping itself and its own alliance (the tag that it's in).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil^
Its not about banning blocking - If that were the case then shared alliance attacks would be banned as well.
Give it time, just give it time


(after all, would those banning farming ever have envisaged 'cheating' in PA as it is defined now?)
__________________
Finally free!
furball is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 17 Dec 2006, 04:39   #78
Fiery
PA Team
 
Fiery's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 904
Fiery has much to be proud ofFiery has much to be proud ofFiery has much to be proud ofFiery has much to be proud ofFiery has much to be proud ofFiery has much to be proud ofFiery has much to be proud ofFiery has much to be proud ofFiery has much to be proud ofFiery has much to be proud of
Re: Have Multihunters lost the plot??

Furball,
In all three scenarios, if you had three alliances deffing each with a mutual def channel for all three... well... that seems like an order from each alliance HC to their members and after I closed each of the planets that were caught deffing out of a/g/c I would then have to start closing all the alliance HC/DC's (the DC's for asking for and selecting the fleets to send) in the alliances involved for a violation of this rule:

18.6. Miscellaneous cheating
(a) Attempts to encourage other planets to break the rules will be considered
a breach of this agreement

I have questions regarding the merging idea so I'll find you on IRC when I am home.
Fiery is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 17 Dec 2006, 11:15   #79
Jester
Pedantic hypocrite
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Back and to the left
Posts: 1,488
Jester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Have Multihunters lost the plot??

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiery
I closed each of the planets that were caught deffing out of a/g/c
If it is the case that defending out of a/g/c is cheating, why doesn't the game include provisions against this? It'd be a fairly easy thing to program into the game

Wouldn't this make the MHs's lives much easier?
__________________
I always wanted to be a dancer, but I could never get the shit off my shoes
.......
Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 17 Dec 2006, 12:41   #80
Veedeejem!
Hibernating
 
Veedeejem!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Team Kesha
Posts: 1,621
Veedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Have Multihunters lost the plot??

I was nearly closed this round for my bad language in galname
Quote:
Originally Posted by www.dictionary.com
1. having or showing a merry, lively mood: gay spirits; gay music.
2. bright or showy: gay colors; gay ornaments.
3. given to or abounding in social or other pleasures: a gay social season.
4. licentious; dissipated; wanton: The baron is a gay old rogue with an eye for the ladies.
5. homosexual.
__________________
[InSomnia]
Official designated driver

[ToF] - [eXilition] - [Rock] - [Denial] - [DLR] - [eVolution] - [ODDR] - [HR] - [Ultores] - [Apprime] - [Ironborn]
Veedeejem! is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 17 Dec 2006, 13:46   #81
furball
Registered Awesome Person
 
furball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,676
furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: Have Multihunters lost the plot??

Fiery, I'm still failing to see how the individual alliance planets would be breaking the support planet rule in the first place.

Quote:
Originally Posted by furball, in reply to Phil^
Perhaps you missed the word 'dedicated'.

Yes, the account does undertake these actions. But it's not dedicated towards doing so, it's dedicated towards helping itself and its own alliance (the tag that it's in).
So how is it breaking the support planet rule, and therefore cheating, in the first place?
__________________
Finally free!
furball is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 17 Dec 2006, 13:54   #82
Phil^
Insomniac
 
Phil^'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 3,583
Phil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus would
Re: Have Multihunters lost the plot??

Quote:
Originally Posted by furball
So how is it breaking the support planet rule, and therefore cheating, in the first place?
Read points a, b and c once again. Keep doing so until it sinks in.
__________________
Phil^
Phil^ is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 17 Dec 2006, 14:23   #83
furball
Registered Awesome Person
 
furball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,676
furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: Have Multihunters lost the plot??

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil^
Read points a, b and c once again. Keep doing so until it sinks in.
Rule 18.2 (f)

Quote:
(f) Support Accounts are accounts which are dedicated to undertaking specific
and repeated
actions which result in an unfair benefit for a
planet/organisation, where an organisation is defined as an alliance or galaxy.
I've made bold the key requirements in the rule. All of them must be fulfilled in order for a player to be in breach of it. This is basic contract law, it's not especially difficult.
  • specific and repeated - sure.
  • planet/organisation - undisputed.

However, I've taken issue with two of the four requirements.

Quote:
Originally Posted by furball
Is blocking automatically unfair? Perhaps not, thinking back to some of the blocks pre-PAX.
Here, I'm arguing that each situation where alliances as part of a block defend as a group rather than individually may not always be unfair. It'd therefore be sensible to treat each case on its merits (e.g. strength of the alliances involved, activity of opposing alliances, present of opposing blocks and those blocks' actions) rather than to institute a blanket rule on such actions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by furball
Perhaps you missed the word 'dedicated'.

Yes, the account does undertake these actions. But it's not dedicated towards doing so, it's dedicated towards helping itself and its own alliance (the tag that it's in).
I don't really need to say much more than this. The planets in question aren't dedicated towards being support planets - they're playing for their alliances. As I emphasised in the scenario, the HCs have decided that the optimal success for their alliances will result from playing in a block. That's why the planets are acting as they are - they're not dedicated towards helping the other alliances.
__________________
Finally free!
furball is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 17 Dec 2006, 14:35   #84
Phil^
Insomniac
 
Phil^'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 3,583
Phil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus would
Re: Have Multihunters lost the plot??

Quote:
Originally Posted by furball
Here, I'm arguing that each situation where alliances as part of a block defend as a group rather than individually may not always be unfair. It'd therefore be sensible to treat each case on its merits (e.g. strength of the alliances involved, activity of opposing alliances, present of opposing blocks and those blocks' actions) rather than to institute a blanket rule on such actions.
Oh really.
Would it be fair if say for example ascendancy decided it would be a super idea to have a couple of other alliances. Say 5 others to act as their bitches in defence, and to escort on attack.
sure the players in their tags would be 'playing' for their own respective alliances but in the grand scheme of it all its just an elaborate method of bypassing the alliance limit and unfairly giving them more players for ascendancy then would be permitted if they were all in the same tag.

No, and if you for one second think that it is, then turn in your badge of "i dont like cheaters" honour and hang your head in shame.
Alliance tags serve to let people play together as a group of people, allied.
Alliances of alliances can be done if they all decide to join the same tag. If they dont then surprise surprise its just a means of abusing the game so they can have more members then the alliance tag permits.

Seriously, are you just taking issue with it because its something to do, or because you just dont 'get it'?
Or perhaps you're wanting to pre-emptively poke holes in it so you can shout " omg hax no fair " when you get closed for doing it?

Edit: unrelated to the whole aspect of it being cheating ( in my eyes ) or not ( in furballs eyes ) , but the very very very last thing this game needs right now is superblocks.
The playerbase is low and fragile enough as it is without making the game into blockwars and boring again
__________________
Phil^

Last edited by Phil^; 17 Dec 2006 at 14:40.
Phil^ is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 17 Dec 2006, 14:43   #85
furball
Registered Awesome Person
 
furball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,676
furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: Have Multihunters lost the plot??

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil^
Oh really.
Would it be fair if say for example ascendancy decided it would be a super idea to have a couple of other alliances. Say 5 others to act as their bitches in defence, and to escort on attack.

sure the players in their tags would be 'playing' for their own respective alliances but in the grand scheme of it all its just an elaborate method of bypassing the alliance limit and unfairly giving them more players for ascendancy then would be permitted if they were all in the same tag.
Nuances evidently escape you, dear Phil. Those alliances would indeed be dedicated towards working for Ascendancy as opposed to themselves, and you can say what you like about unfair benefit.

However, that doesn't apply to the scenarios I outlined. All three hypothetical alliances are already well-known and established, and they aren't aiming for any particular alliance out of the three to win. That's the distinction.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil^
No, and if you for one second think that it is, then turn in your badge of "i dont like cheaters" honour and hang your head in shame.
This, from the person who accused me yesterday of "holier than thou" ranting. Pot, kettle, black, etc.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil^
Seriously, are you just taking issue with it because its something to do, or because you just dont 'get it'?
Should it be acceptable to brute force every rule to cover anything that you don't like? I don't think it should be. We should create a proper set of rules, outline how they are to be interpreted, and stick to that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil^
Or perhaps you're wanting to pre-emptively poke holes in it so you can shout " omg hax no fair " when you get closed for doing it?
I don't play anymore, and I have no intention of returning.
__________________
Finally free!
furball is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 17 Dec 2006, 14:51   #86
Phil^
Insomniac
 
Phil^'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 3,583
Phil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus would
Re: Have Multihunters lost the plot??

Quote:
Originally Posted by furball
Nuances evidently escape you, dear Phil. Those alliances would indeed be dedicated towards working for Ascendancy as opposed to themselves, and you can say what you like about unfair benefit.
That was precisely my point. Well done.
Quote:
Originally Posted by furball
However, that doesn't apply to the scenarios I outlined. All three hypothetical alliances are already well-known and established, and they aren't aiming for any particular alliance out of the three to win. That's the distinction.
on the contrary they are working for one of them to win as opposed to any alliance outside of the tags.
The moment one takes a significant lead, guess what the others do. Yes thats right they become their bitch.

Quote:
Originally Posted by furball
This, from the person who accused me yesterday of "holier than thou" ranting. Pot, kettle, black, etc.
\o/ i was really hoping you would spot the hipocracy there. Its made my day that you were attentive enough to see it

Quote:
Originally Posted by furball
Should it be acceptable to brute force every rule to cover anything that you don't like? I don't think it should be. We should create a proper set of rules, outline how they are to be interpreted, and stick to that.
Thats just it, i dont see it as brute forcing the existing rules,
to me its perfectly clear and logical.


on an aside, im still cranky so apologies etc if i bite your head off sometime during this thread ( again )
__________________
Phil^

Last edited by Phil^; 17 Dec 2006 at 15:10.
Phil^ is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 17 Dec 2006, 16:08   #87
AdmV0rl0n
Registered User
 
AdmV0rl0n's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 207
AdmV0rl0n is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: Have Multihunters lost the plot??

There are already too few players.

Multi Hunters should not close planets, only take action against them.
In documented cases, and I use some small examples, but others should not beyond the whit of man, in cases of farming roids,

The attacker gets the roids removed. The famr planet gets them returned. Both planets have their res reduced to zero.

In the case of ship farming,

The attacker loses the ships, the farm planet also loses the ships. Both planerts have their res zero'd and the loss of 20% of their roids.

You MHers can have a simple sliding scale of punishment, rather than closing people.

If there is no moderation in MHing, the game will continue to lose players. There are too many losses as it is.
AdmV0rl0n is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 17 Dec 2006, 16:28   #88
Willzzz
Legion Idle Master
 
Willzzz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 425
Willzzz has much to be proud ofWillzzz has much to be proud ofWillzzz has much to be proud ofWillzzz has much to be proud ofWillzzz has much to be proud ofWillzzz has much to be proud ofWillzzz has much to be proud ofWillzzz has much to be proud ofWillzzz has much to be proud ofWillzzz has much to be proud of
Re: Have Multihunters lost the plot??

Quote:
Originally Posted by AdmV0rl0n
There are already too few players.

Multi Hunters should not close planets, only take action against them.
In documented cases, and I use some small examples, but others should not beyond the whit of man, in cases of farming roids,

The attacker gets the roids removed. The famr planet gets them returned. Both planets have their res reduced to zero.

In the case of ship farming,

The attacker loses the ships, the farm planet also loses the ships. Both planerts have their res zero'd and the loss of 20% of their roids.

You MHers can have a simple sliding scale of punishment, rather than closing people.

If there is no moderation in MHing, the game will continue to lose players. There are too many losses as it is.

Why is it people like yourself (and im only using you as an example becuase your of course posting at the moment) Seem to keep blaiming the rules and the MH's for loss of players? Their were more closures and threads moaning about MH decisions in the old days then there are now. They were infact even more strictor then they are now. So can people please get it through there heads the fact we are low on numbers isnt just because of the MH's and the rules? And also, before somone comes out and says 'yes but it plays the major factor' thats also false.

The reason why players leave this game is becuase the game hasnt really changed. We still have the same boring graphics, we still have to me the same boring portal, and we keep seeing the stupid decisions. For example the alliance merger option last round.
__________________

Played: Round 1-13. PA Team: Round 13-17. The Return: Round 18-19. PA Team: Round 20. Return.. Again: Round 21-37 Retired: Round 38 Returned: Round 39-45 Retired: Round 45 Returned: Round: 56

p3nguin Founder
Willzzz is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 17 Dec 2006, 17:36   #89
furball
Registered Awesome Person
 
furball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,676
furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: Have Multihunters lost the plot??

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil^
on the contrary they are working for one of them to win as opposed to any alliance outside of the tags.
The moment one takes a significant lead, guess what the others do. Yes thats right they become their bitch.
I really don't see that in the scenario I outlined. It may have been the case in some past blocks, but that usually occurred where one major alliance dominated the block. Fury and Legion were never each others' bitches, for example. VisioN and ToF might have been the bitches of Angels (please don't derail based on this), but that was their choice as opposed to being inevitable. Alliances becoming bitches of another alliance usually happens because of a disparity in their strength. The scenario that I proposed had no such disparity in strength, nor were any of the alliances working for one of them to win - each alliance was trying to do its very best. If they were eventually ranked #1, #2 and #3, the block would have kept on doing its thing and it would have been up to each alliance's own players to out-score/value the other alliances. Many blocks have broken down at this point, but that's not really important here, being hypothetical and all that.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil^
Thats just it, i dont see it as brute forcing the existing rules,
to me its perfectly clear and logical.
I think you believe it's clear and logical only because you want to, and because you expect it to be illegal and so you assume it is. Unfortunatly that's not the way rules/laws work.
__________________
Finally free!
furball is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 17 Dec 2006, 17:50   #90
JonnyBGood
Banned
 
JonnyBGood's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Further to the right
Posts: 19,441
JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: Have Multihunters lost the plot??

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil^
The moment one takes a significant lead
A scientific determined point I'm sure.
__________________
Some might ask what good is life without purpose but I'm anticipating a good lunch.
JonnyBGood is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 17 Dec 2006, 19:09   #91
lokken
BlueTuba
 
lokken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 6,339
lokken has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.lokken has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.lokken has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.lokken has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.lokken has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.lokken has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.lokken has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.lokken has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.lokken has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.lokken has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.lokken has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: Have Multihunters lost the plot??

Quote:
Originally Posted by furball
Here's a question - would any of these scenarios be illegal?

Scenario 1:


I'm HC of Alliance A, an established and well known alliance, and I've decided that I want to block pre-round as I believe (rightly or wrongly) that my alliance's success will be greatest if I go into the round with allies.

I block with Alliances B and C, two other established and well-known alliances. We share buddypacks as much as we can and set up cluster defence channels for the block to ensure fast in-cluster defence. We have a communal general defence channel where everyone sends defence to everyone else: members give DCs both their available ships and their tag for -1 alliance ETA.

When we attack, we attack as a block. By doing this, we get better target coverage and help members with more eclectic fleets to get appropriate targets. It doesn't matter what tag a player is in - the block acts as one whenever possible.

When the round ends, each tag takes its own place and we laugh and joke about wherever each alliance came in the end.
This to me would be perfectly legal, as in cluster defence is permitted regardless of tag. It's been largely useless up to now, so not an issue up to now. But even then, not against the rules.

Quote:
Scenario 2:

All of the same, with one exception. With a week to go, we merged the highest value players from each alliance into a single tag. This gave us the number 1 spot by a considerable margin, whereas individually we weren't close to it before.
Not possible, the rules do not allow this with a week left. If you are talking about the last possible moment, then yes, it would be fine.

Quote:
Scenario 3:

As Scenario 2, except we'd agreed to do it pre-round anyway, no matter how the rankings were looking.
When you agreed is irrelevant.
__________________
"Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life."
lokken is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 17 Dec 2006, 19:13   #92
Phil^
Insomniac
 
Phil^'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 3,583
Phil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus would
Re: Have Multihunters lost the plot??

Quote:
Originally Posted by JonnyBGood
A scientific determined point I'm sure.
Oh jbg, dont make me hold your hand and show you how it could be determined. you're a big boy now, in the big boys tree house with all the big boys tools.
__________________
Phil^
Phil^ is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 17 Dec 2006, 19:16   #93
Paisley
The brother of Spammer
 
Paisley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Paisley - Scotland
Posts: 2,352
Paisley is a glorious beacon of lightPaisley is a glorious beacon of lightPaisley is a glorious beacon of lightPaisley is a glorious beacon of lightPaisley is a glorious beacon of lightPaisley is a glorious beacon of light
Re: Have Multihunters lost the plot??

Quote:
Originally Posted by lokken
This to me would be perfectly legal, as in cluster defence is permitted regardless of tag. It's been largely useless up to now, so not an issue up to now. But even then, not against the rules.
Whilst the points there are valid imo... do we need to go to the stage where every ally has a legal department :crymeariver:
__________________
Missing Subh (r15-r18)
Paisley is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 17 Dec 2006, 19:55   #94
JonnyBGood
Banned
 
JonnyBGood's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Further to the right
Posts: 19,441
JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: Have Multihunters lost the plot??

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil^
Oh jbg, dont make me hold your hand and show you how it could be determined. you're a big boy now, in the big boys tree house with all the big boys tools.
A significant lead is a contingent point depending on the state of alliance relations and the internal stability of the then number one alliance and cannot in fact be determined solely by score or any other combination of ingame factors.
__________________
Some might ask what good is life without purpose but I'm anticipating a good lunch.
JonnyBGood is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 17 Dec 2006, 20:38   #95
AdmV0rl0n
Registered User
 
AdmV0rl0n's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 207
AdmV0rl0n is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: Have Multihunters lost the plot??

Quote:
Originally Posted by Willzzz
Why is it people like yourself (and im only using you as an example becuase your of course posting at the moment) Seem to keep blaiming the rules and the MH's for loss of players? Their were more closures and threads moaning about MH decisions in the old days then there are now. They were infact even more strictor then they are now. So can people please get it through there heads the fact we are low on numbers isnt just because of the MH's and the rules? And also, before somone comes out and says 'yes but it plays the major factor' thats also false.

The reason why players leave this game is becuase the game hasnt really changed. We still have the same boring graphics, we still have to me the same boring portal, and we keep seeing the stupid decisions. For example the alliance merger option last round.
Because, the game needs to be fun to play. Seeing people you know closed for stupid shit is not adding to the game. For 99% of us, the fun is what we play for, and being closed for being 1200th place and some spurious crap as the basis erodes fun.

I *know* I'm not the first to suggest a rethink on the punishments, and I won't be the last.
AdmV0rl0n is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 17 Dec 2006, 21:17   #96
Kargool
Up The Hatters!
 
Kargool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Kenilworth Road
Posts: 3,012
Kargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet society
Re: Have Multihunters lost the plot??

Quote:
Originally Posted by AdmV0rl0n

I *know* I'm not the first to suggest a rethink on the punishments, and I won't be the last.
I know im not the first to shoot down anyone suggesting easier punishments for cheaters, and I wont be the last.

If you cheat you get closed. It is that easy. If theese "friends" of yours are unable to not to cheat to enjoy this game, maybe they should reconsider and play a game where cheating is accepted.
__________________
Planetarion veteran
Kargool is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 18 Dec 2006, 01:20   #97
lokken
BlueTuba
 
lokken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 6,339
lokken has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.lokken has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.lokken has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.lokken has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.lokken has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.lokken has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.lokken has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.lokken has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.lokken has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.lokken has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.lokken has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: Have Multihunters lost the plot??

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paisley
Whilst the points there are valid imo... do we need to go to the stage where every ally has a legal department :crymeariver:
Quite.

In my opinion the rules need to be far clearer and simpler than they are now. The support planets rule is one that's impossible to apply consistently and keep track of. It needs to be coded in some form, or removed.

Not to mention, ambiguous rules usually favour the elite, who can swing it to be interpreted in their favour.
__________________
"Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life."
lokken is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 18 Dec 2006, 02:20   #98
Fiery
PA Team
 
Fiery's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 904
Fiery has much to be proud ofFiery has much to be proud ofFiery has much to be proud ofFiery has much to be proud ofFiery has much to be proud ofFiery has much to be proud ofFiery has much to be proud ofFiery has much to be proud ofFiery has much to be proud ofFiery has much to be proud of
Re: Have Multihunters lost the plot??

Furball,

(f) Support Accounts are accounts which are dedicated to undertaking specific
and repeated actions which result in an unfair benefit for a
planet/organisation, where an organisation is defined as an alliance or galaxy.

ok, you wanted 'dedicated' and 'unfair benefit'

I think that anyone who is idling in a three alliance mutual def channel has pretty much committed/dedicated themself to providing def for other alliances and if an alliance is getting def from people that are not in their alliance/gal/cluster then that gives them an unfair benefit/advantage over the other alliances since they have more chances to get def.
As for taking every case into special consideration and not just make it a blanket rule, anyone that is closed has ten days to appeal the closure. If someone thinks they were wrongly closed I want them to come to #multihunters and speak with the mh who is in charge of the case or with Assassin or myself to see what can be done to get them reopened.
Fiery is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 18 Dec 2006, 13:30   #99
Heartless
CRASHING BEATS 'N FANTASY
 
Heartless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Cold Country.
Posts: 1,912
Heartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like him
Re: Have Multihunters lost the plot??

But fiery, how do you want to know if these people did actually idle in such a channel?
__________________
Ią! Ią! Munin F'tagn! - [*scendancy]
Heartless is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 18 Dec 2006, 15:50   #100
Fiery
PA Team
 
Fiery's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 904
Fiery has much to be proud ofFiery has much to be proud ofFiery has much to be proud ofFiery has much to be proud ofFiery has much to be proud ofFiery has much to be proud ofFiery has much to be proud ofFiery has much to be proud ofFiery has much to be proud ofFiery has much to be proud of
Re: Have Multihunters lost the plot??

Heartless,
You should ask furball since it's his scenario.
Fiery is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 20:39.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2002 - 2018