"Fair Play" System and Guidleines

[Crazy Pete]

I would like to say that I play in AMA, I voted to break the deal with CR, and that I by no means (or anyone else) in AMA think we were going to "win the crown". I don't disagree with the concept of a gang bang and believe that a general guideline and system needs to be in place to make the game better.

Here are some of my posts in the trashy thread, please keep this thread clean and factual leave the emotions at the door. Any ideas or suggestions are all welcomed by any player regardless if you play in a ghetto or not. For me the ghetto is the most important voice that needs to be heard.

So I'm just curious:

SO you have decided the GB is appropriate I don't disagree. Now the punishment, what is the exact punishment? 1k hits, 2k hits, 4 PK's, 10 PK's, whole KD razed EOA?

Just curious because to me this is a precedent setting event and in future ages if there is an ounce of truth to what you peeps stand for the same standard will be applied to every kingdom regardless of who they are.

For example I just formatted our paper about an hour ago, there are 12 kingdoms with hit's into our war the hits are climbing to the 1k mark.

SO by that reasoning we can assume the same will be done to future kingdoms. Now let's chat about an appropriate punishment. The other stuff is getting old. Laws are set by precedent setting cases and I think we can all agree the measures taken against AMA are exactly that.

So how's about an official spokesperson from "Fair Play" post a serious non trash talking post right here about what can be expected in future ages. That means Anri, your out or any other non bias person.

I would like to hear CJ's thoughts on this he seems to be the most level headed, or Zauper. One of them fellows.

What is the required punishment for deal breaking/ 2 vs 1 (same in my books) for future ages?

Cj you just posted I know your here, don't be shy. Have some fortitude an say what the standards are, if you don't know and you're just winging it I suggest you come up with one. Or for me this is just a lynch mob that has no real concern for the game

[Crazy Pete]

another

Are you the official rep from "Fair Play" Nick_mi? From your comments, and I don't want to put words in the mouths of "Fair Play" and don't know of you level of authority for the organization. But to me the standard seems your leaning towards the just punishment for a 2vs 1 or deal break is EOA razes?

I think this needs clarification because if it's a case by case scenario who is the judge? So to me avoiding political Utopian interests the punishment should be the same and not by a case by case scenario. I bring this up because for me the ghetto's represent 90% of the game. Should every kingdom in Utopia have one representative to have one vote on these instances? Or is the group deciding these matters are a closed group of "top kingdoms" with limited lower tier kingdoms like rusty also involved?

I do want the game to be better myself, but for me right now I just see self interest in the situation not a wanting to make the game "fair".

So I ask once again for a representative capable of speaking to these matters. I've heard enough of the trash talking (lynch mob) mentality, you want to fix the game well let's fix it. For me unless the ghetto's have a voice this is pointless.

[Crazy Pete]

I think any kingdom with 20 provinces or more should have one vote, the entity representing "fair play" should represent the whole landscape of the Utopian community which is not just top kingdoms in my books. Or a set guideline is in place that exacts a set punishment for any deal breaks or 2 vs 1. A clarification of what "deal breaks" are would be last on the list I think. To me the most important part is the system and the consistency of punishment regardless if you are a top kingdom that has an interest in the crown or a ghetto.

[Drixx]

Crazy Pete: I tried to offer Elit a way out of this diplomatically before the GB started. Look at page 26 of the main thread, where Elit insisted on adding to the record the part of our conversation where he talked about being robbed of crowns so he was going to take a crown.

A GB is over when its purposes are fulfilled. In this case, AMA has to be completely and irrevocably removed from the crown race, and Elit is still demanding that we hand him the crown, as of 28 minutes ago, in diplomacy. It also will not end until he takes back his threats to ruin the age of any kd involved forever going forward. This means that we will be obligated to find you guys and squash you over and over until your leader swallows his pride, owns up to being wrong in this case, and comes to the diplomacy table to surrender. So far he keeps coming with threats and demands, and thus this continues.

There's no set retaliation to a dealbreak. Sometimes dealbreaks aren't even responded to. It's all about the scope and the willingness of the offender to end it.

[skoyl12]

The more deals that happen on top the more the ghettoes suffer. Deal braking is not a community problem but 10 kd problem, so work it out in irc

[Palem]

Here's the reason laying down the "law" isn't going to work:

If you want to police dealbreaking (and I think just leaving it at ONLY policing dealbreaking is not at all what the goal is supposed to be), then you have to police it SERVER WIDE. If some 2 million nw ghetto breaks war terms, the entire top is going to have to stop what they're doing and GB said kd. If some ghetto agrees to war a kd and then wars another kd, you have to GB them. If some ghetto agrees to move on on the 1st but they have a few lingering hits...guess who's getting GB'ed?

Only you're not going to just police dealbreaking. You're gonna police multi-hostiles, and farming, and other various cheatsy-doodles you don't agree with. Unfortunately for you these things happen in the ghettos every day. So have fun defending "Justice" and never actually getting anything done on your own.

[Lurking Ghost]

Only you're not going to just police dealbreaking. You're gonna police multi-hostiles, and farming, and other various cheatsy-doodles you don't agree with. Unfortunately for you these things happen in the ghettos every day. So have fun defending "Justice" and never actually getting anything done on your own.

So just because you can't be everywhere or deal with everything, it's a bad idea ? To me you just sound like you wanna be against everything.
The last ages we have had ABS doing stuff, then we had AMA playing stuff, and now we have someone else. Sounds to me everyone gets a chance. Isn't that good ?

[Drug]

Crazy Pete: I tried to offer Elit a way out of this diplomatically before the GB started. Look at page 26 of the main thread, where Elit insisted on adding to the record the part of our conversation where he talked about being robbed of crowns so he was going to take a crown.

A GB is over when its purposes are fulfilled. In this case, AMA has to be completely and irrevocably removed from the crown race, and Elit is still demanding that we hand him the crown, as of 28 minutes ago, in diplomacy. It also will not end until he takes back his threats to ruin the age of any kd involved forever going forward. This means that we will be obligated to find you guys and squash you over and over until your leader swallows his pride, owns up to being wrong in this case, and comes to the diplomacy table to surrender. So far he keeps coming with threats and demands, and thus this continues.

There's no set retaliation to a dealbreak. Sometimes dealbreaks aren't even responded to. It's all about the scope and the willingness of the offender to end it.

U r accusing Elit of threating u while threating AMA with GB next age... LMAO. I so smell alliance war next age ;)

Drixx, sorry to say it, but u r NOBODY to decide who can compete for crown and who can't, just becouse ur alliance dominates this age it does not give u any rights. U know next age situation can change ;)

But I agree this **** has to be ended somehow and ppl should go back to 1v1 stuff.

[Chrystal Palace]

i have an idea. how about we treat this like a war game and leave the geneva convention out of it?

[Crazy Pete]

Thanks for your post Palem. I would hope any of the negative posts keep with the negative thread we already have. The he said she said isn't going to help the future of Utopia. I think leaving CR/AMA out of this topic would be for the best and keep it as an idea of principles and guidelines.

Let's face it there is already talks of an AWAR amongst the community, I don't think an AWAR will help the game, if anything the kingdoms suffering from GB's in the AWAR will probably quit playing Utopia. So hopefully it can be a positive thread like Kuhans #deep**** channel or whatever he calls it :P

[Mormon]

Here's the reason laying down the "law" isn't going to work:

If you want to police dealbreaking (and I think just leaving it at ONLY policing dealbreaking is not at all what the goal is supposed to be), then you have to police it SERVER WIDE. If some 2 million nw ghetto breaks war terms, the entire top is going to have to stop what they're doing and GB said kd. If some ghetto agrees to war a kd and then wars another kd, you have to GB them. If some ghetto agrees to move on on the 1st but they have a few lingering hits...guess who's getting GB'ed?

Only you're not going to just police dealbreaking. You're gonna police multi-hostiles, and farming, and other various cheatsy-doodles you don't agree with. Unfortunately for you these things happen in the ghettos every day. So have fun defending "Justice" and never actually getting anything done on your own.

Let's be honest, action is only going to be taken if it affects who crowns. These guys don't care about anything less.

[Crazy Pete]

My feeling is the same Mormon, but I hope for the best and we get a set standard or a set vote across the board or this whole event has nothing to offer to the future of better game play in utopia or growing the game which is diminishing. That it's not just a kingdom that has an interest in the crown when action is taken. Like I said ghetto's represent the majority of Utopia so to me a standard need to be in place for all like Palem says or none. I started in the ghetto's and I can tell you it's not easy being a large province in one :P

[fuzzy|]

just remove in-game cfs

[American Badass]

Before you can action anything you need clear descriptions/definitions of what if classed "fair" and this needs to be decided before the age starts. If the developers gave humans +30% tpa for instance half way through the round, that has influenced the outcome of the round obviously is unfair. Kingdoms dictating rules once the round is half way through is NOT fair.

Some definitions I thought of as examples that need to be built upon (rough, but these show what would be acceptable and not).

- A kingdom can only gain a maximum of 25%(tbc) Land based on what their land was when they entered the war. When it succeeds this amount anything more must be razed in EOWCF as it will be considered a "farm war" and a war to influence the charts. These acres must be razed within the first 24 hours or it will be razed by the competing kingdoms (All CF must be dropped whilst this happens and re accepted afterwards).

See now if this rule/guideline was agreed upon by people competing for the land/nw crown, what happened to Rage last age would have been instantly sorted. It would of saved BB/AMA/EJ/Havoc having a whole conversation of what was a "fair" solution. A decision is always going to favor 1 kd and not another. If this "rule" is agreed upon BEFORE the age starts then if doesn't matter if a kd gains 60% in week 2 or week 9 it has already been sorted what is "fair". They agreed pre-age the upper limit wou could gain was only 25%.

- A thread may only be made when a notice can be given and not before.

This would clear up what happened now and mean calling "dibs" is officially banned. ATM there is no clear side that can say this is clean or dirty.

- All CF offers must be sent in game to the monarch at the time one wants a CF. Any deal made on IRC need to be PMed to both to stop any comments in between getting misinterpreted. Expiration and Notice need to be clearly stated. Even if not stated, NO CF CAN BE SENT IN WAR / EOWCF.

This means what is sent is final. So many people in IRC convo forget to add "not given in eowcf" and then they'll use that to twist their words later...

- A notice is given by sending an in game msg to both the king and steward, starting a ruby dragon and then canceling it on same tick.

This means no one can say someone was trying to notice another slyly.

- If a kingdom requests a CF extension they must submit 10% of land to the kingdom they are proposing the extension from at the time of the CF notice expiration. The CF at this time will be dropped, the kingdom will take 10-11% of the land and a new CF will be sent. A Kingdom is NEVER obliged to accept an extension. If one assumes they'll earn more via a wave/war they can do so. It is up to the kingdom being waved to counter offer or war and accept losses.

This stops people saying they won't extend. I know AMA use to give them for free but this instantly stops all of this unfairness. This means if you make a CF, make it right or lose 10% of your land to update it.

- A Ceasefire is a ceasefire. It is never ok to break it and hit a kingdom. That will be classed a deal break and action will be taken.

This has been in place throughout. It has never been ok to deal break.

-A hostile is only apparent when a kingdom holds the button. A kingdom can't be in a hostile with a kingdom less than 50% (75%?) their NW (This is only a valid hostile if the province in the kingdom <50% hits first.) - After reading your msg private pete it, this SHOULD discourage bigger kingdoms hitting single big provinces IF the bigger kingdom faces retal from the smaller kingdom whilst being wave by a competitor which we can say is totally legit.

Once rules are made appropriate actions can then be made as punishments. I'd love to welcome all and everyone playing utopia to join and create these rules although like Palem said both Whoring and warring kingdoms would spend most of their time policing and not playing. Hence maybe there should be 2 player based lists, one for whoring kingdoms to police and one for warring kingdoms to police.

Once everyone knows what is what the game IMO can get better and it is easier to identify what is **** play and has caused an influence.

[StratOcastle]

Did you guys consider a province alliance over a kingdom structure? This might avoid dragging whole kingdoms into said situations. It may also result in more neutral bias.

I still don't think it works as Palem mentioned. I'm against reverse evolution as we see at the top, but this is mainly because you have players that mistake being elite for being noble. I see debate and very little right. Nothing I love more than someone using debate skills to prove they're right.

My advice is act as an individual. I have no faith in institutions, just do what is good. The funny part is apparently having refugees float into our tiny kingdom(s) and going into vac mode. ~ You could struggle to say " hi " . ~