One rat attacking violation

[wolf bite]

One rat attacking violation

Today I found some violations going on. But because of the objections over it, I think some history must be put into place. They are welcome to discuses it here.

2 days ago, Cloud asked me to clarify what I would consider against the rules. I told him that I can think of a few reasons to use the handing of land over that would not be against the rules, we then went over them. I stated that I would overlook like 3 shots, but may even grudgingly overlook 4 or 5 if obviously done for the reasons stated and not for other reasons.

Today I caught Cloud right after he made 7 1-rats attacks handing over 40,000 land to Snare. I closed down the accounts to look further into it and get them in a chat room to find out what was going on and decide what to do with the accounts.

Checking the accounts, I find that just yesterday, after cloud talked to me about it, Snare had 1-rat attacked cloud 15 times. Also massive aid has been being handed between them.

In a somewhat frustrating hour and a half chat room with both of them. Snare clams that Cloud told him he had got permission to go against the rules. And only a warning should be given to each person when they first do the action. Both of them also had hairline excuses that really had no bearing on what was going on. My intent was to find a way to keep them in the game, not fight over whether what they did was legal, because it was not. They are good members, good people, and I would hate to have to keep the accounts disabled.

I told them that it is posted on the forum and they both know I did bad things, even losing some members, last set on turbo for the same thing. They had knowledge and warning. I then tried to make some kind of friendly settlement to keep them in the game and only take away the benefit they had received, only losing the turns they had spent on it.

However they disagreed and held firm to that they see nothing wrong with their actions and refuse to be set back to were they were before the violation. With my time wasted, and nothing getting accomplished, I said I will discus it no more and they are welcome to take it to the forums to see if their actions were really not against the rules.

And in response to a post in a different topic, only on the old forums could an admin delete the ?edit? in a post, not on this one. The post I had made on that date is the exact same as when written.

Since my decision is being questioned, I bring it to the people. Whether you like or dislike the people, or whether you are their allies or at war, should be overlooked. Lets make a fair decision. For now I keep them disabled. If I hear a good reason to rethink, I am open to it. Better be good.

So be it.


Wolf Bite
(Admin Duties)

[cloud]

The amount of time that this will take for a decision will put us way behind and force us to delete anyways... so there's no real point in this.

[Peace Alliance]

How would it force you to delete? Regular is an ongoing game. There is no suck thing as falling behind.

Wolf, You gave them fair chance. They know the rules, and they knew that they broke them. 15 times? i mean come on, you don't do that by mistake.

Cloud, Snare... don't just argue because of your pride, theres no reason you shouldn't take wolf up on his offer.

[cloud]

His offer was unfair to snare considering he got no gain out of it. He also had no idea that it was illegal considering that's the idea I got from wolf bite. I thought as long as it was following one of the rules he gave me it would be alright, I didn't know I'd get disabled for doing it too many times considering it wouldn't max me since i'm clanned. I also wasn't keeping track of how many times I was doing, I just did it as far as it was needed.

And peace you say there's no such thing as falling behind on regular, but are you even watching it? It's me and snare vs 7 of some of rwl's elite, and we've managed to hold our own. Once they get top we're helpless, you can't recover from something like that.

The reason I talked to WB a few days ago was so that this whole thing wouldn't happen. Do you think I'd talk to an admin about something, then do it knowing I'd get banned for it... no that's just plain stupid.

[Wolf Snare]

first of all, I want to point out that we did this not to max eachother, (we were both in clans!) but did it to save eachother a few turns by passing the land.

Wolf, you admitted yourself you used to do this, invented it even, you dont have to be a hardass just becuase we figured it out. just give me a break. Nextly, I can honestly say that I had no idea that "one rat attacks" were illegal. To the topic you were refering to called intentional maxing. I assumed you just edited it, becuase I'd read through the whole topic as it was posted, but have never seen the last couple posts made (the one you officially outlawed one rat attacks.). On top of that, I have a convo still open where cloud told me he checked with wolf bite and told me wolf clearly OK'd the idea of passing land.

(the night before)

TwilightCantea (5:49:25 PM): score
Auto response from WolfSnare101 (5:49:25 PM): I am away from my computer right now.


TwilightCantea (5:49:44 PM): suiciding land is not illegal as long as it's not done enough times to max the player
TwilightCantea (5:49:57 PM): just talked to wb

the next day..

wilightCantea (1:56:24 PM): lol
TwilightCantea (1:58:26 PM): did u get my message last night?
TwilightCantea (2:10:28 PM): u there?
WolfSnare101 (2:12:59 PM): what message
TwilightCantea (2:13:13 PM): suiciding land is legal
WolfSnare101 (2:13:27 PM): sweet
WolfSnare101 (2:13:40 PM): we were ghunna do it either way
TwilightCantea (2:13:44 PM): yea
WolfSnare101 (2:13:47 PM): but as long as wolf aproves
WolfSnare101 (2:13:48 PM): heh
TwilightCantea (2:13:50 PM): i jsut wanted to get wb's word on it

and with that, provided you can understand it, I can say that I honestly had no idea that it was illegal. note that cloud had asked wolf about the entire thing before we did ANYTHING, and cloud obviously mis-interpreted what wolf had told him.

now, to the fact that this has been brought to the publics attention... well, I dont really care much way. cloud already made his goodbye topic, and I plan to write mine soon, provided wolf doesnt come round.
It's gotten to the point that everytime we work together we end up disabled ?and im tired of wasting my time. I didn't know I was doing anything deemed illegal.

Everyone can post what they feel is suitable, biased upon how unpopular we are or not, its your call.

I guess we wait and see what happens?

(two posts were just made, dont feel like editing so ill stick with what ive written from the begining.,
? ? ? ?-Snare

[Ruddertail]

Meh, I don't know if anyone wants my opinion, but...

If it was indeed a misunderstanding, and cloud thought that since he wasn't being maxed, it was legal, then they should have the stuff returned to its original owners, but have the turns they spent restored.

They shouldn't be penalized for a misunderstanding, but they shouldn't be rewarded for it, either. Resetting both accounts to the way things were before the violations pretty much accomplishes this.

Of course, this is only if it was a verifiable misunderstanding. If it is a flagerent violation of the rules, the punishment is just, and should be continued.

[Neobaron]

I would be inclined to agree Rudder, but considering past actions..........

All I am going to say.

[wolf bite]

Ruddertail, I think you are very right in your thoughts and kind of along the lines I was thinking, I will get back to them. But first I think I am going to have to go over the conversation I had with cloud. He has a copy of it saved, I do not. So I will paraphrase the conversation. Sorry if slightly off, but I am sure of the flow of the conversation.

Cloud: When is the 1 rat attack allowed?
Me: What do you mean?
Cloud: There are sometimes that different strategies besides maxing where it is helpful.
Me: You tell me what those are?
Cloud: Sometimes you want to destroy and enemies ratio, and sometimes you want to keep someone that has been badly attacked from losing too many leaders.
Me: Yes I can see those reasons, how many is the most attacks a person would have to do to get that done?
Cloud: Not sure
Me: I can see no reason to do it over 4, maybe 5 times at the most to get that done.
Cloud: So can I do it?
Me: Only for those reasons?
Cloud: Yes.
Me: Have fun. Away ?

Just as a note, I also see a few shots to keep a friend from death to be okay. But he did not mention it so I can not give him a strategy I have not told to everyone. Now I have given the three reasons that the 1 rat attack can be used for something other then cheating and everyone can see them, I can also see if those reasons why someone did it. In this case I am sure their reasons were to gain as much land before using turns to take the best advantage of the land.

Now to the reasoning done based on the conversation of both guys in chat room.

I feel that Cloud intentionally twisted my words to fit his needs and refused to hear the words that countered what he wanted to do. I must say it is outright gutsy to ask, then do the opposite. I feel a little set up, but will still try to give him the benefit of believing.

I feel that Snare took Cloud?s words as being truth and that Snare did believe Cloud. However I also feel that Snare should know better then to think that I would give one member special permission that I have said I will not give to anyone else. Again I gave him the benefit of believing.

This takes me back to what Ruddertail said about lets just undo it. The problem is I have no way to know how much profit they made since I can?t see what everyone?s stats were 2 days ago. I don?t have the power to give turns. My feeling is that Cloud must have taken a full run yesterday with about 40K land he should not have. Cloud claims that he only used 100 turns yesterday. This I don?t believe. Why would Snare make a run then hand his land up to someone that had few turns, he would not. So Cloud made a ton of profit he should not have had and I have no way to know how much that was.

Then on the other side of this deal, cloud handed way today over 40K land to Snare today. Sure, the land was once Snares, but since it was in the hands of the well-protected Cloud, it unfairly remained safe. If I allow Snare to keep the land, he will make profit he would not have been able to make.

Not knowing how much value they made, I came with two options to try to make it less then I think the got.

1)   I run Cloud?s turns with no food and wipe out half his army, that still leaves him a lot of army. Snare can still take his turns with the land he now has, but should not.
2)   I force both accounts to drop half both their land, but let Cloud keep his full army, Cloud can aid Snare for the land he lost.

I still think that either way, they will come out way ahead of where they would have been had they not done what they did. Thus very fair and I did give them a choice as to which one they felt would be less harmful to them. As far as the turns they wasted and would waste in me doing the damage to the accounts? Since they came out with a profit, I don?t have a problem with it. And even if it can be said they did not make a profit, only broke even, will then that is what happens when they do what they should have known was wrong.


Wolf Bite

[Wolf Snare]

sorry wolf, but you got it all wrong. cloud did not run full turns yesterday. I only got him up to a good leader ratio so he could spy the members of kenedy, he succeeded in getting 3.? he then ran a few turns making food and sent me some becuase I was in bad shape, 0 health and 1 mil food after failing the land into his hands. We were then going to gather up the rest of the land and do stuff with it. but because I was down to 300 turns already and at a major disadvantage (0 health) he suggested we wait until today to run full turns. Which we did. Cloud sent me his troops, made a land run and did stuff with it, then he sent 40k to me becuase as I said, healing 100 turns first was out of the question. I then sent back troops, constructed on the land as to not completely waste turns regaining health, and as I was making an attack run to take the rest of clouds land, you disabled me. that is how it was, which is why I think it rash of you to suggest wiping out clouds army, that he saved up for and bought on his own merit. infact he stored loyalty until a few weeks ago to make the money to buy that army, there was little or no enhancement to it from the land I gave him. he also pulled 80 mil worth of net off the market today, which makes it even more unfair that his hard earned work should be killed off as a sacrifice to get his account back. It's just not right.
Think about what has been said, I swear to god I told it as it happened.

[cloud]

That's exactly how it happened. I had full turns (now 2 days ago) snare sent me land to a good ratio and I espied all of Kennedy's members succeeding in 3. I then made food for aprox. 25 turns, send some to snare and logged off. The next day we both ran with full turns and I took all the land I got that run from other people. So the only benefit we got from this were 3 espys, about 3-400million food (bonus from having more leaders/better ratio) and I saved snare a couple of turns for healing.

Also, if you think that I did make a full run on the land snare gave me, it's just impossible considering I would have also made a full run yesterday(which I did) . It doesn't matter how good you are or how many turns you store, you can't do two full runs in 2 1/2 days.

[Josh]

i know how this works... and it's not intentional maxing... especially because turns are used after sending the land, it's like aid shipments... not maxing
and asking the PEOPLE whether or not they like the to hordes who are CLEARLY besting them for well over a month is not a fair question either.
what the hell are you doing paul? this isn't legitimate, this is wrong.
if you want to make an admin decision, then make it.
if you want to make a biased unprofessional decision because teh game isn't "fun" enough for the players who aren't good enough to compete, then for God's sake, do it and don't hide behind a public referendum

[Neobaron]

Besting whom?  :roll:

You playing Josh?

[wolf bite]

Just so everyone knows, I never intended to leave the accounts permanently disabled, only froze them until I can find what is right. This is not easy.

Okay Snare, lets say I go with Cloud only running 100 turns he said with 40K land he should not have had, and that you now have your 40K land back in which was kept safe from anyone attacking, how do I make it so it is as if nothing ever happened?

As you may recall, yesterday in the chat room, I gave you guys the option of telling me first what you would think was fair. Only keeping everything was suggested. I gave my ideas, then asked again what you think would be fair. It was keeping everything.

Get this. I do not want to over penalize. Just get things back to being fair for the rest of the people. Your actions are not on trial. Correcting them is.

Our members do not have the final decision. But I appreciate their input as to what extra benefit your team had so I can take it away. I will conceder a lesser correction if someone has a better math I should be using, but I will not consider a worse one. If someone can come up with a more even correction, great.


Wolf Bite
(Admin Duties)

[Gen. Volkov]

They weren't besting any of us in the top ten Josh. Not cloud and definitely not Snare. Any one of the top five could have taken the top at any time if he so wished, the only reason cloud kept it as long as he did was because people had other plans or hadn't gotten around to ousting him yet. And it's not about intentional maxing anyway, it's about the 1 rat attack, which gives land at no cost to the player recieving it. Both of them exceeded Wolf's limit of 4.

I can see both sides of the argument, I'm rooting a bit for snare and cloud, but that's beside the point. From what I know, cloud benefitted from the extra land in two, maybe three ways. 1) Extra leaders which he still retains, were he to be re-enabled. 2) Extra food made from the extra leaders. 3)Loyalty which can be converted into cash. From what I have been able to gather, these aren't large amounts, but they still exist. So I would propose taking away 600 mil food, just to make sure, and 10-15 mil loyalty, as well as making it so his leaders are 100 to each hut on his current land. That would be fair in my opinion. Snare, while being innocent as far as knowing about it, did still benefit, so I would propose taking away half his leaders, cash, and loyalty(Unless the loyalty is an insanely high amount that he has obviously been storing for a long time, then I would say just 15-20 mil of it, which would have been made on that run). Both of them claim to be excellent players, so if they can't cope with this rather small meassures I'd be surprised.

[cloud]

I would be willing to accept the first two losses according two volkov, however I only gained 20k land from snare so I shouldnt be put down to 4 million leaders, maybe like 7.5 which is where it would have been had it never happened, instead of my 9.4 million.

Also snare gained almost nothing from any of this, so I don't think his punishment should be anywhere near as harsh. He gained aprox. 20k acres of land from the whole thing, so maybe that should be taken away from him, but as far as loyalty and cash go this didn't help him that way.

If this is the course of action I'd like the turns lost while our accounts were disabled to be reinstated.