rules on fake wars

[DDodge]

The reason it can be argued as wrong is because the intentions of the war system are for two KDs to engage in a 1v1 fight until a winner is determined. The war system, from day one, was not intended to be entered into with another KD when there's no intention of fighting.

Im not arguing that its wrong, just underlining the reasons behind the argument.

[Thunder TA]

As i wasnt there when Mehul wrote the program,i wont try to determine his intentions ,nor reasons for doing things as he did.Altho for many years and despite many changes to the game he never obviously felt the need to restrict kds from attacking into or out of wars..As neither have any of the past or current Devs.

As Flutter said.just because you or i dont agree with something doesnt mean its wrong.Doesnt mean at some point it might not be changed either. But does mean in 11 + years they have seen no reason to change it sofar.

[Palem]

The reason it can be argued as wrong is because the intentions of the war system are for two KDs to engage in a 1v1 fight until a winner is determined. The war system, from day one, was not intended to be entered into with another KD when there's no intention of fighting.

Im not arguing that its wrong, just underlining the reasons behind the argument.

Who said that?

Edit: This is the closest thing I can find to the original intentions of warring...

War is your way of making a name for yourself not only on your own kingdom, but around the world.

Nothing about 1v1 fights or intent of fighting...

[Bishop]

Fake war is not allowed, but nor is it actioned. If this changes there will be an announcement.

[protector]

Again tho, people have hit into and out of wars since the game started.This isnt anything new ,Cant imagine some of the posts we would see here from years back when alliance wars raged almost every age with huge numbers involved.
Yes some undeads are doing this,but it isnt the end of the world.Deal with it.

How do you know this when you have only been playing since age 35?? Hitting in/out of war wasn't as usual as it is currently. Kingdoms dont respect each other anymore (with a few exceptions perhaps) and even small kingdoms abuse everything they can.
Just look at E_Boko for example who even says he let his undeads hit from fakewar...

Fact is you can't automate a system that scans for fakewars simply because there are so many reasons to work around it.
If X hits need to be made you simply set that up with your FW partner. Problem solved.

FW are neccesary at higher levels of play. i use it to pump w/o fear of retales. do i let my undead hit oow, sometimes. depends if they need leets. its crappy gains but gains are still gains. being able to hit oow with no losses is a small bonus considering its a weaker attacker race to say orc or avian.

FWs are not neccecary anymore. 72 hours should give enough time to get in decent shape. Sure there is exceptions for extremely destructive and long wars, but you cant make a rule depending on a select few %.

[Che Guevara]

1.) If you want to enforce "spirit of the game" rules or whatever, then you have to specifically lay down certain things. TBH, I find people making one hit per day in a war to be more of an issue than fake wars. Delete the inactive players so I don't have to waste my kingdom's time razing people out of the kingdom because they can only make one hit per 24 hours.

2.) Until Brian & Sean make a post about FWs I won't believe they are against the rules (Sorry Bishop, you have been known in the past to be wrong. Often. About major things.)

3.) About hitting into/out of fake wars: They are penalized just as you are. You want to retal, go ahead. They aren't making huge hits. Half the time it's only for elites anyway and they don't care about the acres.

4.) Hitting into/out of FWs has been around from the Dawn of Utopia, prot. It was actually fairly common at various points, although the rarity seemed to wax and wane.

5.) Vacation Mode is another issue just as common as FWs. Hiding in VM to protect yourself. Yet it is rarely "actioned" either.

6.) If wars were originally meant to be 1v1, how come you used to be able to have 5 at once or whatever? You used to be able to declare 2 and have 3 more declared on you (Or vice versa).

7.) What Dodge meant about "small, weak case" was that looking at the rules there was a "small, weak case" for arguing that they were against the spirit of the rules and/or against fair gameplay. He didn't mean that infractions against the spirit of the rules or against fair gameplay had a "small, weak case" for being disciplined. The rules do not state that it is a violation, it has been a very widespread practice for 50+ ages, and multiple owners/dev teams have not seen any reason to change the way it works. That would indicate that they don't care if people use the war system for "fake" wars.

8.) Nice jumping to conclusions, aevin, about someone you know nothing about.

9.) Fuzzy, so the -75% gains and such are not huge penalties? Enlighten me then.

[Bishop]

Fake war is against the rules but is specifically not actioned - I'm not interested in peoples opinions about this, it is fact.

If you know of someone abusing VM please report them.

[fariz]

If you know of someone abusing VM please report them.

godly!

[Thunder TA]

Never said i had been playing only since 35 .Thats a kd Date.
As most know ive been here since almost the beginning..It was actually probably used more in the teens and twenties than it is now.During the big alliance wars it was common for multiple kds to PK someone tied down in a war.Hell even Scott 250 remembers that.Old Hall,AA,RAT used to do it all the time.Seems alot have forgot how the game used to be or werent here for it.

[TeddybearSTHLM]

I'm fine with ud's hitting me from oow, as long as they are fine with being razed in return.

[DDodge]

Fake war is against the rules but is specifically not actioned - I'm not interested in peoples opinions about this, it is fact.

If you know of someone abusing VM please report them.

The very simple solution is to take action when it happens...

Suspend the 25 provinces for 48 hours. Simple, effective.

[Che Guevara]

Fake war is against the rules but is specifically not actioned - I'm not interested in peoples opinions about this, it is fact.

If you know of someone abusing VM please report them.

1.) Again, until Brian or Sean posts and says it is against the rules, I do not see it as being against the rules.
2.) To followup with point 1, if it IS against the rules, it needs to be actioned, instead of the dev staff acting like cuckolds (Knowing everyone is cheating on you and not doing anything about it.) I would say any case that can be proven to be a FW would result in the monarchs being deleted. That should put the fear of devs into people when a few high-profile names get deleted. And if nothing else make people actually work for their FWs.

[DHaran]

Brian and Sean are the devs, but guess who the game admin is? Bishop. Nobody really cares what you think is or isn't against the rules Che.

As for DDodge, not everyone should get suspended, but I think the monarchs and any provinces used to trigger the fake war should be.

[John Snowstorm]

Brian and Sean are the devs, but guess who the game admin is? Bishop. Nobody really cares what you think is or isn't against the rules Che.

As for DDodge, not everyone should get suspended, but I think the monarchs and any provinces used to trigger the fake war should be.

they should just be pushed out of fw imo, and all provs set to peasants for being such dishonorable people! :O

48 hour suspension is a frickin *huge* punishment, that kind of thing will kill kds super quick.

[Che Guevara]

Brian and Sean are the devs, but guess who the game admin is? Bishop. Nobody really cares what you think is or isn't against the rules Che.

As for DDodge, not everyone should get suspended, but I think the monarchs and any provinces used to trigger the fake war should be.

And if Brian & Sean say "FWs are not against the rules" or "We don't really care if people use them" then all that "admin" power does very little good regarding FWs. All I'm saying is they need to pick a stance on FWs and then back up that stance with action. If you are going to say something is against the rules, then grow a pair and start enforcing it, or else don't say it's against the rules.

If I went out and shot someone, it is against the law. If the justice system did nothing to me, why would I stop shooting people? It doesn't make any sense to make rules you are unwilling to enforce. "Fear our non-binding resolutions!"