Bug abuse: close plz

[Gerbie]

I constantly hear strong rumors that certain alliance(s) have found a way around the alliance member limit. They work together (sharing galaxies, not attacking each other) but work around the alliance size limit by forming different wings (they call alliances to avoid detection), they even admit their wings are working together, but they are not allied in an alliance, no they are a block (another eufemism, used to avoid detection).

PA team get off those lazy asses and do something about it. This kind of abuse is seriously harming the game. If you set up a limit you should act when people find ways to go around it (like you did with the gal fund limit, which did not really hurt anyone).

Ok closure of all wing members might be a bit harsh, but how about:
- disbanding some wings
- closing the HCs, or
- daily closure of one of their (top) planets.

You don´t even need a reason: if someone uses lame tactics to ruin the game for others you should act, the user agreement gives you every right to do so.

[fuz]

[Kal]

i'm confused....

in round 10 wp had 2 alliances - wolfpack and wolves - they eventually got rid of wolves i think.

But I don't really see a problem if an alliance chooses to split its strength in order to maintain its community....

So what exactly are you talking about?

[Leshy]

How exactly is an alliance splitting into two wings different from two alliances working together?

Since they don't share the ETA 1 bonus to each other, there's no bug abuse.

[A2]

Originally Posted by Leshy

Since they don't share the ETA 1 bonus to each other, there's no bug abuse.

[newt]

aye, for future reference ... for bug abuse to be going on, someone actually has to be abusing a bug in the game. Hard concept to grasp I know, but give it time.

[Gerbie]

A few explanations.

Leshy: there is no real difference between an alliance splitting in two blocks and two alliances working together. Which 'wings' did you think I was talking about? One hint: they were accused of causing stagnation in this game.
Ingame alliances are not just eta -1. It also consists of (amongst other things) a NAP and arbiter.

Newt: the concept of a bug has been stretched a bit. I might have stretched it a bit further. Obviously the limit was implemented in an attempt to try to prevent stagnation as we see happening around us. The simple fact that a lot of people are working together - even without the eta -1 - is a piece of bad coding some people have been abusing.

[Kal]

Originally Posted by Gerbie

A few explanations.

Leshy: there is no real difference between an alliance splitting in two blocks and two alliances working together. Which 'wings' did you think I was talking about? One hint: they were accused of causing stagnation in this game.
Ingame alliances are not just eta -1. It also consists of (amongst other things) a NAP and arbiter.

Newt: the concept of a bug has been stretched a bit. I might have stretched it a bit further. Obviously the limit was implemented in an attempt to try to prevent stagnation as we see happening around us. The simple fact that a lot of people are working together - even without the eta -1 - is a piece of bad coding some people have been abusing.

no one wver said alliances wenr;t allowed naps/allies.... the game simply makes them marginally lerss effective

[Nitros]

close them for causing stagnation

[Razorback]

Originally Posted by idimmu

what you are basically asking for is that people cant defend other people unless they are in the same alliance

am i rite?

or same galaxy ?
thats what we have already.
I think he is more asking in a very pointy way for someone, the admins to split the current leading block by force to remove stagnation.
Eventho this claim might be abit exaggerated however he has a point that maybe Spinner and the gang should consider atleast talking to the ppl involved, if you let the game stagnate for the next 2 month i hope you dont aim to increase your playerbase :gollum:

[Gerbie]

Razorback, your conclusion is correct. If I simply said: split that block by force, then I wouldn't be saying anything new. There's whining enough about it already.

[Leshy]

What utter bollocks.

If you want the blocks to split up, appeal to the HC of the alliances in the block. Having their alliances disbanded or random planets deleted is just nonsense. Simply put, if enough players are bored with the stagnation, then the HC will have no choice to disband alliances. If members start attacking each other regardless of alliances, there's nothing the HC can do. And considering we've been covering a lot of incoming this weekend, I still keep on getting defended against on attacks, I'd say that there's still enough people playing, even in the losing blocks.

And Focht, the round only lasts for just over another two weeks, so don't be a drama queen with your two months

[Barrow|Pony]

This is why PA should hardcode the alliance limit at 50 members.

[Leshy]

Originally Posted by Barrow|Pony

This is why PA should hardcode the alliance limit at 50 members.

And this would accomplish what?

[Jonas]

Originally Posted by Leshy

How exactly is an alliance splitting into two wings different from two alliances working together?

Since they don't share the ETA 1 bonus to each other, there's no bug abuse.

Culdnt have found a better way to say it myself...Wel ofc I could..its Leshy but itll do for now

so I totally agree with Lashy on this one

[MrL_JaKiri]

Originally Posted by Gerbie

Razorback, your conclusion is correct. If I simply said: split that block by force, then I wouldn't be saying anything new. There's whining enough about it already.

So you decided to say something stupid instead?

[Gerbie]

Originally Posted by MrL_JaKiri

So you decided to say something stupid instead?

No, I put it in another perspective. It might sound stupid if you're ignorant though.

[MrL_JaKiri]

Originally Posted by Gerbie

No, I put it in another perspective. It might sound stupid if you're ignorant though.

It's not a bug, it's not a problem, it's not something that could ever be changed ('Hey these people are deciding not to attack eachother!').

Arguing with it sounds pretty stupid to me.

'DAMN PLANTS, always using photosynthesis! IT SHOULD BE OUTLAWED'

[Gerbie]

Originally Posted by MrL_JaKiri

It's not a bug, it's not a problem, it's not something that could ever be changed ('Hey these people are deciding not to attack eachother!').

Arguing with it sounds pretty stupid to me.

It's not a problem? There's no way to change it?

[Judge]

Originally Posted by Gerbie

It's not a problem? There's no way to change it?

How would you suggest it could be stopped?

Or do you intend that every planet should automatically launch random attacks on any other non-allied planet(s) ?


If 2 alliances take a view not to attack each other and cooperate in attacking another alliance, then that is for them to decide. it is perfectly reasonable.

I say this despite being on the end of several combined Phrak/Fang attacks.

But the boot is on the other foot when ELY/Vision/Nos decide to wave a Phrak or Fang target.

It cuts both ways.

[Gerbie]

There have been several suggestions on the suggestions forum to stop people from blocking or to motivate a winning block to split. Some of these suggestions might actually work.

[MrL_JaKiri]

Originally Posted by Gerbie

There have been several suggestions on the suggestions forum to stop people from blocking or to motivate a winning block to split. Some of these suggestions might actually work.

Most of them appear to be restrictions, which would be inherently bad.

[Cayl]

Gerbie-- Hopefully everyone by now has figured out you're just taking the piss.

However, what you're suggesting is that PA-Team take over or outlaw politics. Which is it?

One last question... how is it after 5+ full rounds of playing, you're still a n00b?