Been done.
Flogger found out that Bart razes 2-prov KDs and went on some sort of publicity crusade.
AquaSeaFoam found out that Bart won't let him province crown for free and went onto some sort of GBing rampage.
The great leaders.
Printable View
Been done.
Flogger found out that Bart razes 2-prov KDs and went on some sort of publicity crusade.
AquaSeaFoam found out that Bart won't let him province crown for free and went onto some sort of GBing rampage.
The great leaders.
So flogger didn't look for personal gains he just pointed out Bart is doing something unethical again?
ASF fail behind in Syntico crown list so its only natural for him to attempt gain 1 more crown, still he is not allowed to reveal his indent to Emeriti or any other KD. If he get special treatment because he is ASF he wont feel real game for other people not being famous.
Im sure if my loc was know Bart will have acted lame too. Sorry but my opinion for him is not very high. He cant compete 1vs1 on event fight. All he know is to give up and spend rest from age bully small kingdoms/provs or arrange framing and chart shaping.
I left my monarch to take care for all CFs we got and didn't use any connection for get us CF. We fight for it. Its how every one in small kingdom face his fate.
EOA we got DB from 2-3 charted kingdoms but none got "lucky" to hit us. I had prepared my army 1.35 mill off, and open few windows for retal instant till last 2 sec before server is down.
I'm not so sure he'd be so worried if it wasn't him and his friend getting razed though (flogger).
As for Bart, he's banned, I do not wish to discuss Bart when he can't speak for himself at all.
Like thats stopped you before..Quote:
As for Bart, he's banned, I do not wish to discuss Bart when he can't speak for himself at all.
He's only been recently banned permanently.
Maybe they can allow him to post in forum but not play? :)
I honestly long for some Barticus presence in the forums.
Bart did it for bragging rights, "Look I can raze kill the great flogger"
Geez I don't even remember anymore. Some CF drama, no clue really even though I was the one "leading the charge", under Bart's directive. Was a pretty funny situation haha.
Perhaps his crime is he is flogger?
It's a shame if you took your DBs out of context probably. Try thinking of his actions as reactions more, you might find more similarities then.
According to Flogger scaring him in the forum was the sole goal. If you buy that.
Mike, our players had shared their info years prior when they played in a different kingdom with Versace. This was before the new ownership that made trading legal and absolved past indiscretions. Since the infraction was years in the past, before they joined my kingdom and the new owners had since publicly "absolved past sins" the one who then presently used that years old past kingdom info to hack into her former kingdom mates was the one penalized. Rage has never once had any problem with anyone from rage hacking any accounts because Rage has never shared any log in info. Rage never crosslogged and never had a login/pass list. I understand that this is hard for you to accept given the nature of your past kingdoms, but not everyone played like you. When we last talked on IRC, I believe you even asked a friend of yours who played in Rage and he confirmed no one ever had his login/pass and no one ever logged into his account. If I am so bad, then you shouldn't need to make up false accusations. Rage did trade accounts before it was legal so that's a real thing.
As for forcing people out of a kingdom, let's follow the actual events. 1) Some players organize a massive unprovoked deal break and gb against my kingdom for no reason other than we were too strong to fight 1v1 (a legal game event). 2) Said players delete their provinces and then later join another kingdom as a group and declare that kingdom is the same previous kingdom reborn. 3) Said players hack accounts in my kingdom causing them to be deleted. 4) This new kingdom gets gb'd for revenge (a legal game event) for the past and current events that kingdom pulled. 5) Elit says that since he's now in the kingdom as their external relations guy that there should be no payback for his players hacking others or gbing and deal breaking others. 6) ASF says that yes there should be payback and if he doesn't want to accept responsibility for the actions of the players in his kingdom then he should remove them.
Again, yes Rage traded. We didn't xlog, multi, gold farm, or any other organized farm (yes we owned kingdom in real fights.) We didn't admin abuse (wtf?) Get your facts straight if you're going to accuse. On your list the only ones with any weight are trading (literally everyone did it from super kingdom to ghetto back then) and perhaps "power abuse" but I think this is much less than you would expect and less than you yourself would do.
Rage had some protection by Absalom from unjustified gb's yes, but they probably wouldn't have got gb'd without being in Absalom in the first place. Rage never sent anyone in to block or "soften" opponents. If anything, it was Rage as the one doing the blocking and the softening (still powerplaying but not in the direction you think.) Every kingdom in the top had NAPs and CF deals both Abs and not Abs. If it was truely a big advantage to have a large eoa NAP group, then everyone would NAP everyone. More often than not, the best kingdoms had a significant advantage by having fewer EOA NAPs. There was also a strong political benefit to being "independant."
I think the non-compete clause stuff started in the ages after Abs disbanded and before Emeriti formed. My first experience with it was BB trying to force it on Emeriti after gbing them, but I think it was also used (by BB, others?) prior to this. I think it might have been forced onto RBL after Pew Pew learned them in war instead of trad marching. As for "short CFs" I think you've taken advantage of cf timing as well as anyone else.
Yet no one was gb'd. Sounds like a pretty mild rampage.