BOUNTY- Ereptor's Raiders, #50

[Holby]

 Due to his crimes in online attacking, sacking, and capturing, I am placing a bounty upon Ereptor. If you can max him (21 attacks) 500 mil is yours. Take him down to 1k land I will pay 2 bil. For his death, 10 bil.

All can take this up, send me proof IG of your success and the respective amount will be awarded within 24 hours.



Golden Slumbers

[Ereptor]

 Umm.  double holbys price and that is what i will pay for his      ....*grins*  oh and i am good for the money too.  *winks*

[Yellow Eyes]

 I wouldn't call "Online Attacking" a crime. I've never seen anything about this topic when I was here, and since I've returned. You're all acting like children. "Wah! He attacked me when I was online. *goes and cries for rest of night*" I mean, geez, its part of the game:

Through this all, you will compete against other players all vying to achieve the same goals.

And the main way to achieve these goals is by using war, which involves attacking, no matter what time, whos online, no one cares. And another thing, is I could just leave my IE up all night, having It refresh its self, and then no one would every attack me! I could rise to the top and stay there, because "It's a crime to attack someone online." See how strange this is? This Case, CLOSED.

[Death Eater]

 Online attacking is only considered unacceptable by most when the player is actively running turns

If he's simply online looking at the scores and whatnot, its fine.

[wolf bite]

 I have always said that on line attacking is disgusting in most cases. I agree that if at war with someone or if there is a major vengeance for a past act of that person, and then it is part of the game.

But this is not a world war; this is a game of taking and using land. One person takes land and tries to hold it from the next guy that takes land and tries to hold it as everyone ties to get to the top. In regular, people only get full turns in every 4 days; it takes over half an hour to use those turns. The players should not have to wait until there is no one on line, and then quickly take all their turns because someone will jump on and wipe them out.

When taking turns:
Your health is low and the damage done to your army is far greater
Your leader ratio is low because you have not filled your huts yet so the player cannot defend against being poisoned.
Those that play a game with little resources find their markets and foragers gone and can not feed their armies
Any plan the player was waiting for 4 days to do has been destroyed
The player may not have a full army and cannot defend themselves
The person my not have their towers up
And a multitude of other situations that can completely mess up a person?s entire enjoyment of playing.

In short, attacking on line is much more an act to harm the other person then to help themselves.

From what I see, Ereptor without warning or provocation started attacking people that were actively taking their turns. Those people both wrote him asking him to stop, as the mail was going back and forth, Erpetor continued attacking them and maxed them both out using sack and capture.

If people don?t do something about people that play in that manner, then anyone can be next. What I think is funny is in the letters Ereptor?s response seemed to be ?be quite or I will be at war with you.? Since he had just on line attacked them with sack and capture and maxed them out that rather seems like an act of war. No one is afraid of the vengeance of a person that indiscriminately wipes out people.

People were complaining about the game not being exciting enough. Lets see if most of the players attacking ereptor livens the game up. If nothing else, it should teach him etiquette.


Wolf Bite

[Ereptor]

 Wolf you are over exagerrating here.  I didn't wipe them out.  If i wanted to hurt them, i would have poisened his 14 bill bash and 1.4 food.  I was running low on food and i needed land.  This whole topic is stupid and absurd.  Holby and gaz are just mad because they were trying to accopmlish something and i got in the way, unintentionally.

People keep seeming to forget that this game was  not made for happy pony raisers and those of the like.  This is war and if you want to discuss my tactics and say how childish and inconsiderate i am.  Well so be it.  I will always play like Ereptor.  A   b l o o d    thirsty land hungry warlord.

Edit<

Again you are assuming i knew what was going on.  And if in my experience in wars with you we always had to wait until you logged off to start our assualts and our climbing of ranks. Because you would attack us while we were ONLINE and trying to gain a lot of land.  

Ok this is what happened.  Gaz attacked me previously a couple days before 35 times straight.  Is that not an act of war wolf? ?? ?   Course not because i wasn't online....*PFFT*  whatever.  So then i log and see him with a bunch of land.  Boom, my chance to get my land back.  But darnit he is online, so i shouldn't attack him, because that would be, umm, rude?  LOL right...  Course not, i b l o o d y hit the guy hard and take his land.  of course he messages me and says, stop it or else.  Or else what?  Give me a break.  The guy won't even tell me who he is and is trying to threaten me.

The only reason i can see you defending these two guys is that you are gaz.  Hmm now that makes sense.

[wolf bite]

 Now who is jumping to conclusions?

I do know who Gaz is. I also know that he/she has been under attack limits of no more then 4 attacks per player per run. So your statement that a person that is not in a clan and under attack limits could have attacked you 35 times straight is an out right lie. I also know that this is the second time you have maxed that person who has never attacked you more then 4 times a week.

Further, the only person that Gaz does not have attack limits against is Holby as they are apparently at war. I have never been at war with Holby. So your assumption that I am Gaz is not well thought out nor investigated. What you seem to have done in to interfere with a private war between two people that did not want any outside involvement.

Looking at the news I can put together the following. There was an on line fight between two consenting people at war. Seems Holby had done a suicide mission against Gaz to destroy his army. Gaz then attacked Holby for Holby?s land, Holby was about to retaliate and take his land back. You jumped in and took Holby?s target. You then attacked Holby and capture the leaders he was going to attack Gaz with. Seems Holby wanted to do the damage to Gaz himself but you maxed his target. Basically, someone of your experience should have seen that they were in an ongoing fight, and should have stayed out until it was done and their turns were used, then taken which ever target you wanted. Gaz then waited and took all your land.

I can see them coming together now for the common cause.

Others are welcome to do a search to verify the above statements.

I defend them because I have always had the same opinion of on line attacking, sacking, capture, and maxing people who are not at war.


Wolf Bite

[Ereptor]

 14 days, 3.1 hours ago Gorg Gaz (#5) (?) None Ereptor''s Raiders (#50) (?)None Land = 21,711 Attacks = 35

Good points wolf.  You must although understand this.  I consider everyone that can break me my enemy unless they have told me otherwise or they are a friend.  Also my opinion on online attacking has never changed.  You and your friends have many times disrupted my plans by comming online.

A major point you have not hit is that the online status refreshes every 10 mins.  So when there is land on reg, and a lot of it, there is no time to waste.  From the time i logged on til the time i began attacking was less than a min.  I don't waste much time.  You and holby are trying to portray me as someone who saw people online, knew what they were doing, and then attacked them.

True i saw them online.  But i did not give a second thought at not attacking when i saw the land available.  I will not stand for this threatening from people and bounties when they are thinking i had some reason or motive for attacking which i did not.  My motive is usually always the same and doesn't change unless someone becomes my enemy.  

What you are assuming wolf is many things.  I don't lie, nor would I over something like this.  If i am mistaken i will submit to it.  But calling me an outright liar is not something i take kindly to.


As the leader of an Army, your goal is to become the ruler of all other Warlords. Using everything from diplomacy to war, you must strive to build an Army wealthier than all others. Through this all, you will compete against other players all vying to achieve the same goals.

[Ereptor]

 Ok the info i sent was "bugged"....

NEW: From Gorg Gaz (#5) (?)
lol, the attack thingy has been bugged from the start. here is what mine says:

Time Ago Attacker Defender Land Attacks
12.4 hours ago Gorg Gaz (#5) (?)
None Ereptor''''s Raiders (#50) (?)
None 18,805 21

13 days, 0 hours ago Ereptor''''s Raiders (#50) (?)
None Gorg Gaz (#5) (?)
None 32,343 40

13 days, 0 hours ago Gorg Gaz (#5) (?)
None Ereptor''''s Raiders (#50) (?)
None 854 3


so by this, 13 days ago you attacked me 40 times, and none last night.

only makes you look bad using bugged info to state something that could not have happened.

[Holby]

 Ereptor, check the news, the "Recent Attacks" thing is bugged, it doesn't work properly. It shows completely insane amounts of attacks/land most of the time. One run it showed up with my whole 50 attacks on one guy, hehe.

[Ereptor]

 My mistake