Land farm

[windhound]

Eh, there's always been a line between using the code and abusing the code.
Its usually fairly arbitrary though, and things that have been legit in the past are now banned. 

The landfarm cannot use its land for its own benefit. 
I believe it actually does make more food/cash when it has more land, but that's not really the point.  No playing account derives benefit from the landfarm having land.
It all leaks out eventually, the landfarm having a max would appear to block clans like VTN from using the landfarm to pass land between clan members -- an act that I assume would have you screaming your head off.
Dropping land to the landfarm while knowing its maxed is not currently against the rules.  Should it be?  I donno.  What effect is it having on the game? 

Also, there have always been knee-jerk reactions to someone taking over the game.  Ereptor's rule resulted in a fair number of game changes. 
Changes related to land locking are not exactly without precedent.  In fact, there's so much precedent I'm not sure what you're arguing.
Sevz exposed a weakness that allows a group of three unclanned players to dominate the server, are you saying this is not something to be looked at? 
"Frankly I've noticed some of your changes are mainly geared toward making it harder for him [assuming Sevz]."
Um.  Der?

[Rakefur]

Maxed at 25k land. Since when?!

P.S. Did not read wall of text.

[Wolf Snare]

It's straightforward code abuse, don't be naive. If Anyone unfavourable (in your eyes) suggested / executed this tactic, you wouldn't hesitate to throw the ban-hammer around. This is what I'm talking about. I'm sick of this ridiculous double standard, the staff is supposed to be impartial, not self-indulgent. Shadow is being held in the highest regard when in reality he's disingenuous and his motives are transparent. Our actions and reactions construe our true intentions, we can't forget our responsibilities to this website come first.

Shape up Kyle, your personal opinion on matters shouldn't be portrayed through your position of power, it leads one to infer that you're corrupted. I'm sure you'll make one of your "internet rat" jokes, but this job has to in fact be viewed as a job, and your duties must be carried out in a professional manner. No picking favourites in the forums and overlooking things so your opinion is conveyed, and certainly no biased code changes or suggesting abuse to thwart your enemy. Furthermore, your attitude towards people needs to be impartial as well, you can't pick sides and belittle people you don't agree with. Let's not become a shining example of corruption through power.

For the record, I don't care about taking sides in issues, though I will defend myself when wrongfully accused. I could care less about Sevz & Shadows arguments, only that things be carried out justly. Sevz is gagged for now, and given his response to the other topic it's a good place for him. However, I will not stand by and watch this double standard be further abused; the admins are here to create a friendly atmosphere, not patronize their enemies, provoke them, and face no repercussions.

I will not vouch for sevz when he comes back, but out of respect for the community I will insist he exhibit more conventional behaviour. Though to be effective, Shadow must stop too; the banter soon turns to a dismal & inappropriate back-and-forth game that Shadow always wins because of status. Alternatively, if sevz continues out of control, you take appropriate measures, warn him , gag him, ban him-- without the antagonistic approach. Rebuking those you dislike only to fire back with an insult is unprofessional.

Peace, you sometimes let your emotions get the best of you when dealing with issues that tick you off (ie sevz, getting attacked on turbo) so you fall into this category too; take a page out of windy's book.

I'm not trying to be the worlds biggest hypocrite, I learned the hard way and am attempting to lead by example.

[Shadow]

Sigh. Recent changes have made Sevs' life more difficult is because he was able to use the code to do something that was not intended in 3.0. Due of course to some mistakes on my part. If anyone else had done it, the changes would have been the same, I assure you. Of course there is no reason you would believe me on this, and I don't particularly care.

I am not sure what your problem with this land farm thing is. Dropping land to the farm does not benefit anyone directly, except to slow down land entering back into the game. Which is why I think it is different from, for example, using the market to get around aid limits.

Note that I am not actually banning anyone for that, rather I am thinking of ways to make it not a useful thing to do.

Now, I did not say that land dropping to a maxxed farm was not code abuse. I am saying that because it is a new phenomenon and has only been in existence for a short time, the effect it will have on the game is not fully understood. I ask that you be patient for another round so we can see the damage it will cause before it gets left alone or coded out. That's all. I am not encouraging people to use it, nor am I condemning its use. I just want to see what happens before I code it out.

For the record, it is dead easy to code out, so once a decision is made one way or another, it will be quickly dealt with. And when I say "decision", I mean the collective feedback of everyone involved. Contrary to popular belief, there are a lot more people than just me who are involved in changes and ideas.

The rest of your post(s) I am not going to bother responding to.

[Peace Alliance]

Snare you aren't making a very balanced argument here.

The current issue with land farm is of very little strategic value. In fact, the same issue would have existed many years ago before we had the open attack op spell, and it was rarely used for a strategic purpose.

On the other hand, using the market to pass things w/o aid limit, and having nameless hidden cities are both bugs that Sevs has been exploiting this round. These are of a significant strategic value. They were also completely unreported, and the only reason we know about them is because we have been watching over the game carefully.

So is your argument that Shadow is not making balanced decisions? Because that would be false, the land farm is of little strategic value, and sevs' exploits are of great strategic value. Therefor you can quite easily see why Shadow would leave the land farm as is while fixing some of the more powerful exploits.

[cloud]

The nameless cities likely aren't Sevz fault. I initially created a couple of nameless cities to test if 1) the game allowed me to and 2) to see if it was possible to take a city without a name (which you can). While capturing other peoples cities I found that many times their name would be deleted in the process for an unknown reason.

[Wolf Snare]

Sigh. Recent changes have made Sevs' life more difficult is because he was able to use the code to do something that was not intended in 3.0. Due of course to some mistakes on my part. If anyone else had done it, the changes would have been the same, I assure you. Of course there is no reason you would believe me on this, and I don't particularly care.

When attacking someone 3/4's of your NW you now lose 4% of your army. What was the significance of this? You can't deny that along with your hints, you've implemented slight changes that were not made with a clear head.

I am not sure what your problem with this land farm thing is. Dropping land to the farm does not benefit anyone directly, except to slow down land entering back into the game. Which is why I think it is different from, for example, using the market to get around aid limits.

It was the context in which you addressed the situation. You let your  personal agenda of watching sevz fall cloud your judgement, and kept it in the game whilst suggesting ways to exploit the code and keeping it in game until further notice for "testing?" This is silly, give your head a shake.

using the market to get around aid limits.
Note that I am not actually banning anyone for that, rather I am thinking of ways to make it not a useful thing to do.

Did it never occur to you that this was an unintentional flaw in your coding? You strive to make the market viable to the extent that it is (in most cases) the only means of effectively purchasing troops. Then you go and claim code abuse without justification? This has only been abused in Sevz last run, and I do recall reporting a suggested change. Given what I interpret from your first posts in this topic, you're just another case of the pot calling the kettle black. Whether directly exploiting or suggesting ways for other people exploit, you're both at fault.

Now, I did not say that land dropping to a maxxed farm was not code abuse.

Don't be "intentionally thick", as you like to put it-- no, you didn't directly say it was code abuse, you said you'd like to see it play out as trial and error before considering removing it. Of course, this was after you suggested a way for the lower half of the game to abuse it in an attempt to spite sevz locking efforts. Don't get me wrong, I could care less about the minor details. What I am getting at, is if Sevz & crew had somehow mobilized this technique to benefit them, you'd have raised the red flag and spouted more accusations of code abuse. Instead, you promoted it, because your personal feelings got in the way. All I'm saying is don't be a hypocrite and don't discriminate between right and wrong based off what you find beneficial.

I am saying that because it is a new phenomenon and has only been in existence for a short time, the effect it will have on the game is not fully understood.

Aren't you currently maintaining a scholarship? Surely someone of your intelligence level would be able to make the connection that there's really only one motive for locking land on the farm, and several viable reasons to up the hitlimit rate. Must I keep repeating myself? Honestly, do you need a month of cause & effect trials to realize what you already know? Again, I'm tired of you making decisions for your own enjoyment. You wouldn't suggest people drop land to the farm, and keep it the same, if you didn't intend for people to exploit it for your personal gain. I think you'll realize the reason I'm making a big deal out of this has nothing to do with ingame events, it's the way your mind processes things and the way you execute important decisions based on personal preference rather than for the good of the code.

I ask that you be patient for another round so we can see the damage it will cause before it gets left alone or coded out. That's all. I am not encouraging people to use it, nor am I condemning its use. I just want to see what happens before I code it out.

Why? I do not see your logic in this, or any reason other than fulfilling your own selfish desire. My reasoning? You insist on

To be honest I kind of like having the farm work the way it does. Land that is dropped there trickles back into the game a little bit at a time and cannot be locked, so there is some strategic value in dropping land there. On the other hand, dropping land will not be common in 3.0 as there is very little benefit to doing so except to play keepaway with it.

Don't tell me you don't have ulterior motives-- you aren't even trying hard to conceal them (other than before you edited above quote, your intention was far more noticeable). Nonetheless, I wonder what strategic value you speak of?  Playing "keep away" from who? Come on Kyle, cut the BS and stop being unjust with your powers.

For the record, it is dead easy to code out, so once a decision is made one way or another, it will be quickly dealt with. And when I say "decision", I mean the collective feedback of everyone involved. Contrary to popular belief, there are a lot more people than just me who are involved in changes and ideas.

This tickled me. Funnily enough, you make changes on a whim most of the time, sometimes without even consulting anyone. I don't recall anyone agreeing that desertions should be so heavy for attacking someone slightly below you. Don't be a hypocrite: despite what you perceive--or claim to to save face, the things you say are often contradicted by the things you do.

The rest of your post(s) I am not going to bother responding to.

Typical, I didn't really expect you to. What defense could you possibly produce for the way you acted in the other thread, deliberately allowing the tooth brothers to insult people who you care not for? Get your act together and stop being biased and unfair. Breaking the rules is breaking the rules, stop overlooking things on purpose.

Snare you aren't making a very balanced argument here.

The current issue with land farm is of very little strategic value. In fact, the same issue would have existed many years ago before we had the open attack op spell, and it was rarely used for a strategic purpose.

I beg to differ Ollie. I'd say my argument is justified because I'm speaking the truth about issues that have long needed addressing.

On the other hand, using the market to pass things w/o aid limit, and having nameless hidden cities are both bugs that Sevs has been exploiting this round. These are of a significant strategic value. They were also completely unreported, and the only reason we know about them is because we have been watching over the game carefully.

Actually, I reported the market exploit and suggested a viable fix for it. initially, it was simply strategic and no foul play was intended. Ask cloud-- the mercs only hold so many troops for a casher. Cloud was wrongfully accused of working with sevz for the first several days, when in reality they were both just running a reseller strat. Cause and effect my friend, you might realize had you come out of your shell and stopped passive play to check out the true dynamics of 3.0. This city bug you speak of is nonexistent to my knowledge-- It's a readout error, nothing more. Nothing like the time when you took over turbo with 100 invisible cities and destroyed every aspect of fair game play. I forget how that one ended, did you report your findings Ollie?

I suspect you jumped down my throat because I dropped your name in my former post; don't sweat it. You are not nearly as much at fault for breaching forum conduct as one of your colleagues.

So is your argument that Shadow is not making balanced decisions? Because that would be false, the land farm is of little strategic value, and sevs' exploits are of great strategic value. Therefor you can quite easily see why Shadow would leave the land farm as is while fixing some of the more powerful exploits.

This makes little sense, and the logic behind it troubles me: the landfarm is a means of locking away land from sevah. If you can't see that's what Kyle intended to happen by outright suggesting ways to abuse it, and further, keeping it in the game for no alternate reason, then I don't think anyone can help you make the connection. My question is,why leave something that disrupts legitimate game play in the game, until "other priority fixes are made?"  Shadow himself deemed an "easy fix" so why not take 2 minutes to do it Ollie? Oh, that's right...

if they are both at fault, why must only one be acknowledged for being so? I know people see Sevahs name and instantly combat my efforts, usually adopting the opinion of the majority of the forum based off of dislike for him; you've got to recognize that my argument is in no way attempting to justify sevz actions--hell, it has nothing to do with him at all and I could care less for what happens in regard to his indecencies. All I want is the mistreating to stop and the power to be used responsibly. If you can get over it and realize that, you'll see I make a very good point. I may use Sevah for my examples, but as so I provide the evidence for my argument: justice must be equally, and everyone should be treated fairly. Breaking the rules is breaking the rules, whether you're the forum badass or you're hiding behind your shiny admin title. Most importantly, powers should not be abused for personal gain. 

[cloud]

Someone's awfully defensive.

[Shadow]

But this "problem" hasn't even happened until now. This is the first day that I have seen the land farm on more than 10k land....

Now it has happened, maybe we won't even need another round to decide if it is a good thing or not!

What does everyone else think about the issue? Should the land farm be maxxable? Should it be clanned? Let me know over the course of the next day or so.

Some opinions from people who aren't working under the assumption that I have nothing better to do than spend my time diabolically plotting ways to make their lives miserable would be a nice change, tbh.

My motives are not ulterior, Snare, they are quite open and honest. Sevah showed that the attack system made land locking far too easy. So my changes this round and those planned for next are to remedy this. Again, if it were anyone else up there, I would be doing the same thing.

[Peace Alliance]

I responded because you made (and are still making) a bad argument.

Bringing personal attacks into it doesn't strengthen your position. I explained to you why your argument doesn't hold water: The land farm issue is a minor, insignificant problem compared to the one's we fixed immediately. This is beta, and we have a set of priorities to make because that's how game balances work. You really need to start looking at this with a little more perspective. You are making a very big deal out of something that is very very small.

[cloud]

I think we should just get rid of the land farm, throw "Hidden Fox" into a clan called "land farm", code the game so all dropped land goes to that account, and then everyone wins.

[Peace Alliance]

I don't mind that idea. I bet I'd outrank you by the end of the set.

[cloud]

I don't mind that idea. I bet I'd outrank you by the end of the set.

I don't think you've ever outranked me at anything PA.

[Wolf Snare]

But this "problem" hasn't even happened until now. This is the first day that I have seen the land farm on more than 10k land....

Now it has happened, maybe we won't even need another round to decide if it is a good thing or not!

It happened because you suggested ways to abuse it. Quit being disingenuous.

What does everyone else think about the issue? Should the land farm be maxxable? Should it be clanned? Let me know over the course of the next day or so.

Some opinions from people who aren't working under the assumption that I have nothing better to do than spend my time diabolically plotting ways to make their lives miserable would be a nice change, tbh.

Cute. Don't flatter yourself, all i want is for you to stop being so opinionated and justify what you do through appropriate and unbiased means. This is universal, the forum favouring needs to stop as well. Had ally insulted firetooth so persistently I'm confident he'd be gagged. Again, give your head a shake and be fair.

My motives are not ulterior, Snare, they are quite open and honest. Sevah showed that the attack system made land locking far too easy. So my changes this round and those planned for next are to remedy this. Again, if it were anyone else up there, I would be doing the same thing.

I guess there's no getting through to you. Though allow me to suggest you get over yourself a bit, it's getting a tad ridiculous.

I responded because you made (and are still making) a bad argument.

Bringing personal attacks into it doesn't strengthen your position. I explained to you why your argument doesn't hold water: The land farm issue is a minor, insignificant problem compared to the one's we fixed immediately. This is beta, and we have a set of priorities to make because that's how game balances work. You really need to start looking at this with a little more perspective. You are making a very big deal out of something that is very very small.

Go re read my post Ollie, you completely missed my point. perhaps it is you who needs a little more perspective. I'm not making all this fuss about the landfarm and only the landfarm, it's the process in which Shadow makes and carries out his decisions.

[cloud]

Jesus Snare, your mindless, redundant drivel is even beginning to annoy me. Get over yourself.