Jump to content

A call to arms (against Alex)


 Share

Recommended Posts

22 minutes ago, SleepingNinja said:

It's almost like Celestial might actually know this and are declaring attrition wars just to be annoying and spiteful. Kinda like how they're probably annoyed you "sided" with HW in the opening rounds.🤷‍♂️

Ikr, extremely annoying to have slots filled by people on attrition who either do nothing or nuke my 800 infra (apparently that helps them close the damage gap with Hollywood idk I’m not milcom). This all just seems like pointless complaining, sure there were a few wars that shouldn’t have been peaced, and I hope admins are taking action with that and reversing mod points if any were given out, yet it remains that most of the wars (that were peaced at least) were probably just an attempt at beige fishing from Ro$e, considering HoF and Arrgh arent part of HW’s coalition afaik (Inb4 sekrit treaty), and therefore shouldn’t really be counted in Hollywood’s stats the nuke spamming argument makes little sense as there are plenty of HW nations with a lot more infra to blow away if that was the goal. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Horsecock said:

I don't believe for a second that a single Ro$e member with 0 military would declare attrition wars on multiple max military 700 infra HoF (who they're not even at war with) members with the honest intention of doing damage. Even the ones who did attacks only did so specifically to AVOID slot filling moderation. And yes, I'm arguing against my own benefit here, since having our slots filled massively helps us.

I honestly agree with that, I've seen a few people declare on HoF and Arrrgh people while they have zero military and clearly no intention to missile/nuke a pirate.

Personally I think beige fishing against people you are in a global with is perfectly fine, but the second you start looking for outside sources (pirates and raiders in this scenario) it should be a breach of the rules.
Beige fishing the enemy is reasonable, you are basically testing their beige disciple and overall co-ordination. 
 

  • Upvote 5
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Zevari said:

I honestly agree with that, I've seen a few people declare on HoF and Arrrgh people while they have zero military and clearly no intention to missile/nuke a pirate.

Personally I think beige fishing against people you are in a global with is perfectly fine, but the second you start looking for outside sources (pirates and raiders in this scenario) it should be a breach of the rules.
Beige fishing the enemy is reasonable, you are basically testing their beige disciple and overall co-ordination. 
 

A big problem with this is that beige fishing against people you are at war with is called into question with the reasoning Alex has given for the moderation action here. Not to mention other valid concerns have been brushed aside by stating that “moderator discretion” would be a part of it. If this continues then there needs to be a definitive explanation of what is and is not slot filling communicated to the player base so things like this don’t happen in the future and moderators and players are on the same page.

Humans cannot create anything out of nothingness. Humans cannot accomplish anything without holding onto something. After all, humans are not gods.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Alex said:

I have already responded to a similar thread here:

Quote:

I'm the one that issued all of these warnings, and to be very clear, even any attempt to do an attack I have given the benefit of the doubt on and not issued a warning. It is possible that there were nations who received war slot filling warnings that had wars where they did missiles/nukes, but it would clearly state in the warning that it wasn't for those wars but for ones where they had been at 12 MAPs for at least a couple of days and had not done any attacks.

Unless I made a mistake on a warning, this is 100% not true.

It's also worth noting that on all war slot filling violations or multi reports, aside from a few instances, I have been making all of these decisions myself. At some point we will probably get to the point where I feel comfortable letting the hired moderators make these calls, but to date I have been making these decisions personally.

Please also see:

 

This is how people have been playing the game for how long? Suddenly you want to change how the rule is enforced. You're being inconsistent. I think that's what the outrage is about. You still do damage to someone when you declare on them, you cost them more money and who knows you might get an opportunity to get a missile or nuke. Expecting nations in a losing war to do nothing and get beat down indefinitely is an unrealistic expectation on your part.

  • Like 4
  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

"Most successful new AA" - Samuel Bates

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you're going to ban people for doing the only reasonable thing in a losing war, then the problem isn't their actions, it's the war system. If you don't like how it's currently working, change it to the way you want it to work smh.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Horsecock said:

How is it annoying to have your slots filled? The annoyance here is that they're railing against the game admin for enforcing his rules.

If it's true that Ro$e members declared with the express intent of getting beige time, then yeah they had it coming. But if it isn't, and he's banning people for turreting etc etc, then I am very much against that. I think I saw a screenie where someone's war dec message was "I'm doing this for the beige time tbh.". Hope they got what they had coming.

Edited by Joe Schmo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Joe Schmo said:

If it's true that Ro$e members declared with the express intent of getting beige time, then yeah they had it coming. But if it isn't, and he's banning people for turreting etc etc, then I am very much against that.

As a quick reminder not a single person has gotten banned over this.

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 1

Why our you reading this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, penpiko said:

Ikr, extremely annoying to have slots filled by people on attrition who either do nothing or nuke my 800 infra (apparently that helps them close the damage gap with Hollywood idk I’m not milcom). This all just seems like pointless complaining, sure there were a few wars that shouldn’t have been peaced, and I hope admins are taking action with that and reversing mod points if any were given out, yet it remains that most of the wars (that were peaced at least) were probably just an attempt at beige fishing from Ro$e, considering HoF and Arrgh arent part of HW’s coalition afaik (Inb4 sekrit treaty), and therefore shouldn’t really be counted in Hollywood’s stats the nuke spamming argument makes little sense as there are plenty of HW nations with a lot more infra to blow away if that was the goal. 

that emoji seems to have left a misunderstanding. That was more of a "i don't [email protected]#$in know" as it seems pretty pointless from where I'm standing too, that was simply the only logical reason I could think of if you would call it logical.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, chad said:

As a quick reminder not a single person has gotten banned over this.

Even then, don't think they should get mod strikes for turreting if its suddenly illegal for whatever reason, because that was unannounced. Anyways, reading up on this, seems the ones which were genuine mistakes were rolled back and the rest are literal beige baiting so 🤷‍♂️

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, SleepingNinja said:

that emoji seems to have left a misunderstanding. That was more of a "i don't [email protected]#$in know" as it seems pretty pointless from where I'm standing too, that was simply the only logical reason I could think of if you would call it logical.

Understandable, Have a Great Day - Meming Wiki

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@AlexThe fact that you have been ignoring major loopholes in war and beige mechanics for months and yet, besides fixing those here you are pushing for unnecessary updates and enforcing moderation on a tactic, I think its fair to say that its a "tactic" now considering how long it has used. Your constant disregard of the collective opinion of the community is shocking. Considering that you have personally issued moderations, it only shows your disconnection from the game community. Even so, I still request that you work on the issues that have existed for so long to avoid anymore occurrences like these. 

  • Upvote 1

image.png.53cb39df314b30232b410b94801b6f72.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You get the power to hug people and they die after a week, you go around and you hug people you don't even know every day, police can't stop you, there's no law that can punish you for that, are you still a serial killer?

You're in an alliance war, you declare war on random pirate nations and you only launch one missile, for the current rules is not slot filling, did you still attacked trying to get beiged?

Now, you're playing a browser game you can't win even if you win, you try to get beiged by pirates using incorrect/incomplete rules in your favor and you complain when Alex gives warnings, even in case that you're technically correct does that makes you a sad person in my eyes?

Spoiler: the answer to all three questions is yes

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators
On 7/18/2022 at 6:18 PM, Joe Schmo said:

Even then, don't think they should get mod strikes for turreting if its suddenly illegal for whatever reason, because that was unannounced. Anyways, reading up on this, seems the ones which were genuine mistakes were rolled back and the rest are literal beige baiting so 🤷‍♂️

It's not "suddenly" illegal, these have been the rules for years.

I understand it seems like people were doing this before and getting away with it - there have been over 1.3 million wars in the game and moderation does not go through and review each war. We only review the wars that get reported. If no one was reporting this previously, then it is likely that things were gotten away with. That doesn't mean they weren't against the rules then, though. Each warning that has been issued in the past week or two has been the result of someone making a report for war slot filling, me investigating, and following the rules as they're written to make a determination and issue a warning if deemed war slot filling.

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 1

Is there a bug? Report It | Not understanding game mechanics? Ask About It | Got a good idea? Suggest It

Forums Rules | Game Link

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Alex said:

It's not "suddenly" illegal, these have been the rules for years.

I understand it seems like people were doing this before and getting away with it - there have been over 1.3 million wars in the game and moderation does not go through and review each war. We only review the wars that get reported. If no one was reporting this previously, then it is likely that things were gotten away with. That doesn't mean they weren't against the rules then, though. Each warning that has been issued in the past week or two has been the result of someone making a report for war slot filling, me investigating, and following the rules as they're written to make a determination and issue a warning if deemed war slot filling.

So to confirm, you are saying that nuke and missile turreting is a rules violation?

Joe Schmo was implying that this is what you meant, and that is what you are confirming here, just Incase you weren't aware.

So to be crystal clear, if I declare a war, with no intention of "winning" because I have zero military and can't, and intend only to toss nukes at their infra, is this a rules violation?

 

Furthermore, if so, beige cycling is also a violation, no? Since "winning" the war seems to be defined by the game mechanic of beige here, not doing so after you've won would indicate you had no intention of winning, yes? 

 

For everyone's sake we need to make sure everyone fully understands what this means, and for that we have to make sure we understand exactly what you're saying vs what it looks like here. Because what it looks like here is that the answer to both questions is yes. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators
57 minutes ago, Zei-Sakura Alsainn said:

So to confirm, you are saying that nuke and missile turreting is a rules violation?

Joe Schmo was implying that this is what you meant, and that is what you are confirming here, just Incase you weren't aware.

So to be crystal clear, if I declare a war, with no intention of "winning" because I have zero military and can't, and intend only to toss nukes at their infra, is this a rules violation?

 

Furthermore, if so, beige cycling is also a violation, no? Since "winning" the war seems to be defined by the game mechanic of beige here, not doing so after you've won would indicate you had no intention of winning, yes? 

 

For everyone's sake we need to make sure everyone fully understands what this means, and for that we have to make sure we understand exactly what you're saying vs what it looks like here. Because what it looks like here is that the answer to both questions is yes. 

I haven't issued any warnings for missile or nuke turreting, except for one which was an accident and subsequently removed. You can win a war with missiles/nukes, even if it is slow.

To your other point, I think you are talking about when you have someone near zero resistance but do not finish the war even though you could, because you don't want to benefit your opponent by giving them beige. I generally do not see this as war slot filling, and this has been a tactic used since the beginning of the game (and technically even before the beginning of the game in CN) usually referred to as staggering. To my knowledge no one has been issued moderation points for this.

  • Downvote 1

Is there a bug? Report It | Not understanding game mechanics? Ask About It | Got a good idea? Suggest It

Forums Rules | Game Link

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.