It completely makes it a fake war.Quote:
Originally Posted by Purplehaze
Printable View
It completely makes it a fake war.Quote:
Originally Posted by Purplehaze
Were in the rules is that stated, that's the point. The Conditions of what constitutes a FW were not explained well enough then.
Its not stated explicitly, like many things. That changes nothing though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Purplehaze
You changed a rule to ban FWs, then decide to include things that nobody considers FWs and delete on first offenses without clarifying. Yea, that's good work Bishop.....
Well, we certainly would appreciate it if the all powerful all knowing and all seeing devs and mods would explain the rules nicely to us poor little plebs so that we don't get trap carded
I look forward to seeing your extensive survey that allows you to state that nobody thinks its a fw.
I can understand the stress that prlly comes with your position Bishop... and I completely think it was a great rule added to the game, No FW's, but their is obviously a lot of confusion on what is and is not allowed. I think people are mainly so strong against the deletions because it really doesn't make people feel comfortable knowing at any moment you can get deleted without warning for something that is not truly defined as being against the rules of Utopia.
Both involved players referred to it as a fake war. Where is the ambiguity?
Hey guys chill - this is Utopia, perfect world! :-D
This thread is like a SOPA... But sorry Utopia have no Senate or Parliament. If they say they make Stop Fake War Act (SFWA) means they make it. Done! If SFWA can use to "action" any province etc etc - too bad!!! Utopia is police state - not democracy!!!
Only thing we can do - all cow have a black-out (self-delete) to show Utopia the serious consequence of having SFWA! In fact - anyone can black-out, because you never know when you gonna get deleted by Utopia!
Let's self-delete in protest guys! :-D
You are embarrassment to doctors? Hmmm. Now I giggle when I see my doctor. Why you do this to me???Quote:
Originally Posted by Realest
^ This. GG.Quote:
Originally Posted by DHaran
Hi, I suggest that you think before you act its probably alot to ask but try. Who is this nobody, your argument failed already since there is obviously alot of people that think this okey. So, SINCE WHEN DO THE PLAYERS DICTATE THE RULES?! Put away that crack pipe son, the top tier and alot of middle and lower didnt consider trading as cheating either but that didnt make it legal. You obviously missing the biggest point, the one with the power dictates the rules, so why do you keep spammin same **** over and over again?Quote:
Originally Posted by DHaran
lol @ trading. Knowing a rule and intentionally ignoring it is not comparable to this. Nice try though. A ban was made on FWs, not in war prov NAPs during real wars, those are 2 separate things and have never both fallen under the definition of a fake war. Like I said, I can understand the position of the devs even if I don't agree with it, but deletion was the wrong way to handle it.
Concept is the same, you argue that since nobody agrees its a fake war then it should be okey. Newsflash it doesnt matter what the players think, its those who se the rules. Since you dont set the rules you cant really dictate what is and whats not.
Where do u draw the line between it being a fake war. For example me saying i wont hit someone as an agreement to get to war, and then plan a war around not hitting that person all the time knowing that if i HAD to i can easily break my promise to get the war win. That is lies and deceit should be an acceptable way (by the rules of the game, not how i play) to get a KD into war, and those kinds of non hits can always be changed.
Since its done and over why dont we stop crying and get some clarification on fake wars.
CASE 1:If i have a friend in another kd and i agree to not hit him and he agrees to not hit me its by definition a fake war? That is even if we each participate in chains and actively trade hits into the other kd but dont hit each other its a fake war?
CASE 2: How about if we SAY we wont hit each other, we dont but the ultimate goal is just to leave our friend as the LAST chain if the other kd is to stupid to surrender?
Please explain the difference between
1. NOT hitting someone becasue it goes against my war plan and asking them to make a similar war plan
2. Having a kd-kd agreement that there will be no dragons.
Or a difference between
1. We can only war u if your X prov doesn't fight, so the prov sits there and does nothing
2. We can only war u if your X prov doesn't fight, so the prov goes into vacation mode
3. You will win if your cow beats ours, so the cows dont fight each other or no war.
4. You will win if your cow beats ours, so the cows going into vacation mode.
Why isn't anyone interested in self-immolation? I hear it's all the rage in the Middle-East!Quote:
Originally Posted by aremarf
OK if self-deletion is too nasty - how about mass vacation mode and kingdom tags + banners?
I mean, look - when Bishop represents Utopia devs in claiming ultimate authority - that's a fact. He IS the (spokesman of the) Muammar Gaddafi of Utopa. I think as players, the only way we can exert power is to do some sort of mass protest. But I guess we're not as desperate as the Libyans or Egyptians.