Anything interesting happening?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Palem

Both of those things fall into the reasons that the reset button was put into place. Namely "Oh ****, we made a mistake. Sure would be nice if we could just fix it real quick rather than deleting and having to pay for a whole new invite back into the kingdom." and not the reason of "Hmm, I bet we could pump a ton of extra resources into a few provinces if we spent the entire protection just acting as a farm and then resetting into suitable provinces."

---

And the final question:

Would it have been abuse last age if after sending 2mil gc + some sols to my kdmates, I reset my province instead of abandoning it?

We would have been happy to reverse bank with with those provs instead.

p.s. Is soldierswapping mechanics abuse? This is the 4th time I've asked, now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zauper

Was it against the rules when Sanc and BB decided to reset provs into fae in consecutive ages because they realized fae made for a better setup?

Was it against the rules when we reset a prov during protection because we realized he had the wrong personality?

---

Difference is clear: they realized other race was better and reset, using the option for what it's meant to do.
You were planning to reset from the get-go...see the difference?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Proteus

honestly its laughable if havoc is mad at pyro for being actioned, i would have reported cr myself if they were silly enough to pull a stunt like that in my war. leson here is any time you do something to abuse mechanics and use themin a way other than what they were intended, you can expect to be actioned.

perfect case in point was before at end of war your army would come home immediately. there was a guy who suicided in war for huge gains, wd right after and immediately 2x razed an enemy cow oow, this was actioned and mechanic was fixed. reseting provinces is meant to let you change race/pers per age or during age but at cost of having to start over again, its not mean to generate free resources to be aid bombed over and over.

---

Now you've done it CR! You made me agree with Proteus, for crying out loud..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by faegan

Difference is clear: they realized other race was better and reset, using the option for what it's meant to do.
You were planning to reset from the get-go...see the difference?

---

They aided out all of their soldiers and gc prior to reset.

Sent aid -> reset.

Free stuff. Right? That's the problem, yes?

Inconsistent behavior is not new here. Neither is Bishop's lack of interest in dealing with utopians or people making baseless/wild accusations.

Edit:
@Faegan: You're throwing hollow stones.

They didn't create their provinces with the sole intention of being farms from their rest of their kd, and then resetting.

Could you at least admit, that the way you guys were using the reset button was clearly not the intention of the mechanic?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zauper

They aided out all of their soldiers and gc prior to reset.

Sent aid -> reset.

Free stuff. Right? That's the problem, yes?

---

No, motivation is the problem. Read my previous comment: you planned on resetting to get ahead. If you keep referring to precedents where shady actions weren't sanctioned....that's just laughable. If it was reported back then, it wasn't considered abuse. Case closed. This is the Age 61 case of CR game mechanic abuse. New case, same judge, different ruling...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Palem

They didn't create their provinces with the sole intention of being farms from their rest of their kd, and then resetting.

Could you at least admit, that the way you guys were using the reset button was clearly not the intention of the mechanic?

---

I would agree that the initial intent of the mechanic was not for you to be able to send aid and then reset. It was for you to be able to reset. Conveniently, a mechanic was implemented that prevents you from sending aid and resetting. Thus, you cannot send aid and reset.

However, Bishop stated explicitly in the thread that's been linked a million times, from last age, that he had no issue with provs in war resetting after slaying dragons/sending (+kd benefit, equivalent of resources), or to get a kdwide advantage by adding military at the bottom, and that was on the community to police.

I honestly don't see a difference between the two.

I also don't think the original intent of homes is to allow you to draft to negative peasants.

Or the original intent of nwbg is to allow you to safely farm acres by manipulating your nw.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zauper

Sending aid and deleting (or now, resetting) has been in the game forever. It's an expected action for someone to take when they're quitting (or changing what they want to play). Bishop has now decided that sending aid is a hostile action for the purpose of those (and I suspect VM as well).

Last age it was not abuse of resetting to do it to fund/slay dragons though, interestingly.

I think that the issue we have is that Bishop implemented a mechanic so that resetting couldn't be abused (without announcing it), but then decided that resetting STILL constituted abuse, in spite of the mechanic he put in place to balance it. That's the issue. If there wasn't a mechanic in place to balance it (no 24h window before you can reset after sending aid), you could argue it was abusing a game mechanic. The issue is that a mechanic was designed specifically to prevent abuse, and they just decided that it still constituted abuse.

If resetting is the problem, why not remove resetting? Aid can't be the problem, people send aid then reset or abandon all the time. (Bishop didn't action me last age when snaggletooth sent ~2mil gc and some soldiers in aid and then abandoned!)

It's the lack of consistency. Some game mechanics are 'ok' to abuse (mass sending soldiers to win provnw [this is legal so long as you don't use vacation, which is an interesting difference], hiding in vacation to win provland) as some examples in the last few ages. Or dropping NW to declare war, dropping NW to get better gains -- those are not only ok, but encouraged game mechanics for us to abuse. What exactly distinguishes abusing NW mechanics from abusing reset mechanics? Honestly, what is the difference between what Bishop said was ok last age (resetting crappy provs to get stronger provs during war) and what we did (resetting crappy provs to get stronger provs)?

Will we be actioned for homes pumping? What about soldier swapping, is that an abuse of EOW mechanics?

Here's another example -- Two or three ages ago, I asked Bishop about cow NAPs in war. He told me that if you agreed to a cow NAP before a war began, it would be ok (agreeing not to hit certain provs) -- this was when strippers / pew2 were warring with one agreed, but if you agreed to one during the war, it would not be. The age before he had actioned strippers for making a similar deal, and the two ages later he would have no problem with a full CF agreed to during war between RBL/AMA except for some agreed hits before WD -- something that I have been told a number of times would explicitly be FW, and thus actionable (because it extends war protection to allow folks to train safely).

---

cheater .. one would think by now you should be able to follow the spirit of the game rules

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anri

Like i said. Another sad day for utopia. Soon comes a baby, 5 ages old named cJ to give his expertise with underlined and bolded text. Someone like Bishop might listen and sanction another kd.

Stupidly amazing

gg utopia

---

Anri has ESPn.

Also didn't BoB and Rusty do this for like 20 days in an early OOP war, just keep resetting and buying credits, and I do not recall anything done then? What is different from that and this? Just wondering?

Palem - Your stance doesn't make sense. Last age I was the only person on the server that thought the explore bug was a bug. Bishop clarified it was a bug and made it the existing mechanic for the age, which altered it from being bug abuse to being acceptable use. Your stance makes it clear that anyone who used the explore mechanic last age should be actioned this age, especially if they use another Mechanic in a manner of which Bishop has already explicitly said is acceptable.

Anyway, no one here is going to change bishops mind or reverse the damage done by his taking action. It's a relatively pointless debate because the only accomplishment will be the following:
Acceptable use changes from one age to the next (inconsistency)
A bunch of mudslinging against CR/RBL from the community because, well, you always kick when someone is down

@ Zauper-
Well for starters, that thread was up before the devs admitted that this was a problem iirc (and please feel free to correct me if that's wrong). Then they started to take steps to stop this behavior. They took even further steps in the age transition apparently. You guys keep mentioning that they should have announced that this was going to be actionable like they did with Fakewars, but the difference is that in one age transition, they were taking a hard stand and changing their positions that something that wasn't actioned was now going to be actioned. If tomorrow, the devs decide that they're going to start actioning soldier swapping, then I fully agree with you, they need to make an announcement, but in ways that I've already mentioned, this is different. This was something that was a known issue that they've been struggling to prevent. It very quickly became less and less ok and that change was certainly documented.

Now, you have my sympathy as far as inconsistent/changing opinions on what is ok to manipulate and what isn't. I say that in with full sincerity. However, when you're knowingly manipulating a mechanic in some way that it's not intended (especially something as murky as this situation) for and you have _v_this_v_ rule starring you in the face, you lose the right to complain about being deleted.

Quote:

---

Spirit of the Rules

Players attempting to manipulate rules and quirks of the game in ways obviously not intended may be subject to deletion. Because of their nature, these types of circumstances are considered on a case-by-case basis. Users should avoid actions they believe are against the spirit and intent of the game.

---

cJ reported us to Bishop. I have reported him to his dad for not studying for his algebra test. Fair trade.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Godly

cJ reported us to Bishop. I have reported him to his dad for not studying for his algebra test. Fair trade.

---

cJ asked his mother for a 7 stone handicap and got it. And yet cJ has no stones! How can that be!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Palem

@ Zauper-
Well for starters, that thread was up before the devs admitted that this was a problem iirc (and please feel free to correct me if that's wrong). Then they started to take steps to stop this behavior. They took even further steps in the age transition apparently. You guys keep mentioning that they should have announced that this was going to be actionable like they did with Fakewars, but the difference is that in one age transition, they were taking a hard stand and changing their positions that something that wasn't actioned was now going to be actioned. If tomorrow, the devs decide that they're going to start actioning soldier swapping, then I fully agree with you, they need to make an announcement, but in ways that I've already mentioned, this is different. This was something that was a known issue that they've been struggling to prevent. It very quickly became less and less ok and that change was certainly documented.

Now, you have my sympathy as far as inconsistent/changing opinions on what is ok to manipulate and what isn't. I say that in with full sincerity. However, when you're knowingly manipulating a mechanic in some way that it's not intended (especially something as murky as this situation) for and you have _v_this_v_ rule starring you in the face, you lose the right to complain about being deleted.

---

Last age Bishop clarified that it was a legitimate use of the reset functionality, and so I ceased to have that belief (as to the sole purpose of reseting provinces). That's why my post reads "initial intent". Because Bishop re-interpreted it to expand it. (I have no idea if that thread was before or after the change, honestly). I'd also argue that 'the intent of reseting provinces' includes 'reseting provinces after sending aid'.

But you just said it in your post -- if they take a hard stand and something that wasn't actioned was not going to be actioned they should announce it. Last age, this wasn't actioned. This age it was. So why don't you think it should have been announced?

e: Does this mean you're telling me that soldier swapping is a legitimate use of EOW mechanics?