rules on fake wars

[Nuriho]

stop nitpicking. If you think for one second that fake war is not an abuse then try it next age and see what happens.

The whole point is that it isn't obvious, Bishop.
There is nothing saying not to do it. There is no clear indication that wars are meant for a certain reason.

How can it be against the rule of "obvious intent" when the intent of war is far from obvious. As it is now, which is the current time in this time-stream, the only thing obvious about war is what it is capable of. The intent is not obvious, and if you'd read my posts it'd be clear that all I want is for it to be.

You can say all you want that it is against the rules, but reading the rules, it is clear it is not against them.

You make the rules, Bishop? That's fine and cool, but keep them updated and clear and concise. All I get from you talking like that is that I can be breaking the rules of Utopia game simply by breathing wrong, metaphorically, since breathing's intent is not clearly defined in the wiki or the rules.

tldr; to break the rules by Bishop's own definition you have to be abusing something beyond its obvious intent. The intentions of most items in game are not clearly defined. Implied is the opposite of obvious, so it's unjust to enforce the rule of obvious intent on implied intent.

[DHaran]

The whole point is that it isn't obvious, Bishop.
There is nothing saying not to do it. There is no clear indication that wars are meant for a certain reason.

How can it be against the rule of "obvious intent" when the intent of war is far from obvious. As it is now, which is the current time in this time-stream, the only thing obvious about war is what it is capable of. The intent is not obvious, and if you'd read my posts it'd be clear that all I want is for it to be.

You can say all you want that it is against the rules, but reading the rules, it is clear it is not against them.

You make the rules, Bishop? That's fine and cool, but keep them updated and clear and concise. All I get from you talking like that is that I can be breaking the rules of Utopia game simply by breathing wrong, metaphorically, since breathing's intent is not clearly defined in the wiki or the rules.

tldr; to break the rules by Bishop's own definition you have to be abusing something beyond its obvious intent. The intentions of most items in game are not clearly defined. Implied is the opposite of obvious, so it's unjust to enforce the rule of obvious intent on implied intent.

How is the intent of war far from obvious? YOU HAVE NO POINT. You are arguing for the sake of arguing and doing nothing to back it up. Please name something ingame that has an intent that isn't obvious, I would love to hear it. You are hopelessly dense.

[Midoki]

I'm not a monarch so it doesn't bother me either way, I was just curious after trying to look at it from both points of view, i'll stop my curiosity... look what it did to the cat o.O'

[Nuriho]

war/w?r/
Verb:
Engage in a war.
Noun:
A state of armed conflict between different nations or states or different groups within a nation or state.
Synonyms:
verb. fight - combat - battle
noun. battle - fight - struggle - combat - strife - conflict

War stance, and its benefits, were designed for conflict between 2 kingdoms. There is no conflict in FW, the mechanics are not being used as intended, it is an abuse.

It's stated nowhere that it was designed for that.
If my conflict in general is to get to the top, and a war to reduce attacks on me is available, why should I not use that tool? It is in no way obvious abuse.

it seems you want clarification, DHaran. My conflict is with the game trying to grow right? Declare war and help myself grow, right?
Even if I don't need to attack the opposing kingdom to keep majority of acres, it's a conflict, a war that is ongoing and I am actively participating in.

There is nowhere, to repeat what i've said, that the intention of war is obviously declared. To deem it illegal is fine, but it needs supporting proof that backs its illegal status up. As it stands now there is none.

Enforcing a rule about abuse via obvious intent using implicit or implied intent is unjust.
It is not fair.
It is tyranny.
It is the opposite of what the devs are trying to achieve, it is the opposite of what the players want.

The players want no fake wars because it is unfair to them, they want acres and they don't want people to have an easy way out.
To ban fake wars for a rule based off of obvious intent abuse when fake wars are implied intent abuse, it is not fair. To be fair, you are being unfair. To be just you are being unjust.
That is what this is about.

How is the intent of war far from obvious?

The intent that war was brought into the game from the developer is for people to grow?
is for people to bash each others provinces?
is for people to get more gains fighting each other?

where is the intent posted? what is the intent? no clue, no idea; no source found.
It is far from obvious. If the intent was to help people grow, then Fake Wars is not abuse of wars. If it is to help people bash each others provinces then Fake Wars is not abuse, as it helps provinces in the fake war grow to a suitable size to where they can fight on their own terms and continue the bashing.

What else in the game has non-obvious intent? Dragons for one. The function of dragons is to hurt another kingdom. It doesn't matter what kingdom, you can send it to them. The implied intent? I dunno. To hurt someone hurting you? To give you an advantage vs another kingdom you want to hurt? To randomly send and terrorize people? All? None? no clue, no idea; no source found.

[DHaran]

Sitting in a war and doing nothing across the board on both sides is not a conflict. You yet again fail to make a point. If you are doing nothing, you are participating in nothing. It does not need to spelled out as there are far too many cases to be explained that could be considered a fake war, and because the intention of war status is obvious, and has obviously been abused until this point. It's like demanding they explain in entirety how the cheat detection system works, otherwise it isn't fair because we don't know how we got caught. It's idiocy, not logic.

[Bishop]

The whole point is that it isn't obvious, Bishop.
There is nothing saying not to do it. There is no clear indication that wars are meant for a certain reason.

How can it be against the rule of "obvious intent" when the intent of war is far from obvious. As it is now, which is the current time in this time-stream, the only thing obvious about war is what it is capable of. The intent is not obvious, and if you'd read my posts it'd be clear that all I want is for it to be.

You can say all you want that it is against the rules, but reading the rules, it is clear it is not against them.

You make the rules, Bishop? That's fine and cool, but keep them updated and clear and concise. All I get from you talking like that is that I can be breaking the rules of Utopia game simply by breathing wrong, metaphorically, since breathing's intent is not clearly defined in the wiki or the rules.

tldr; to break the rules by Bishop's own definition you have to be abusing something beyond its obvious intent. The intentions of most items in game are not clearly defined. Implied is the opposite of obvious, so it's unjust to enforce the rule of obvious intent on implied intent.

LOL - that is all I have to say about this entire post. I just confirmed with my 10 year old, he understands the difference between a war and a fake war. Do you want his number?

[flutterby]

A tactic that has been allowed for 10+ years is now going to be wrong because others do not believe it is a valid tactic?
It's more or less a diplomatic solution, which "With allies, you will fight to make your kingdom strong". That's what it says on the
front page by the way, it doesn't define allies just as kingdom mates. It has never been against the rules and I don't see why
there is a need to penalize someone for what has been legal behavior for over a decade. Stupid? Maybe. Lazy? Sure but it has
always been a legal tactic. Now people are being louder and more obnoxious over how their kingdom got shafted.

[DHaran]

It was only allowed because Mehul was too lazy to fix the need for it. At least B&S are making an effort to do that. FW should have never been allowed to happen.

[John Snowstorm]

Just because thats the way the game was run for a long time doesn't mean its the best way to run the game.

Lets see what happens. :)

Personally I predict people will be making a lot more CFs and notices will get longer. Wouldnt be surprised if people start asking for 5 day notice or w/e.

[fuzzy|]

.....Personally I predict people will be making a lot more CFs and notices will get longer. Wouldnt be surprised if people start asking for 5 day notice or w/e.

i'd just reply to some1 asking for 5 day notice period with a "LOL, no"

[John Snowstorm]

War
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This article is about war in general. For other uses, see War (disambiguation) and The War (disambiguation).

War is a state of organized, armed, and often prolonged conflict carried on between states, nations, or other parties[1][2] typified by extreme aggression, social disruption, and usually high mortality.[1] The set of techniques used by a group to carry out war is known as warfare. An absence of war is usually called peace.

armed, conflict, agression, social disruption, high mortality.

all of them are absent from fw;

armed: generally youre going in fat and low on troops
conflict: nope, you don't hit each other or op each other
social disruption: nope, your peasants are happy and make you tones of GC
high mortality: nope, you repop in FW and hits have unusually LOW mortality if they do come in, and no ops at all.

[John Snowstorm]

i'd just reply to some1 asking for 5 day notice period with a "LOL, no"

people are already making 72 hr CFs now, not too much of a stretch to assume they will make longer ones with no fw.

48 hours isnt even nearly enough time to draft and train if youre on the kind of drafts that a real sci pump requires, even on emrg+pat draft. So if peeps want to sci pump, then they will have to make longer notices I think.

[Darkz Azn]

odd ... no FW = undead food ... fear the return of the true power!!! Undead will rise to true power again!!!!

[KuhaN]

Uh, FWs should be against game rules, it's kind of like exploiting a bug tbh. I like what B&S are doing here.

[Nuriho]

LOL - that is all I have to say about this entire post. I just confirmed with my 10 year old, he understands the difference between a war and a fake war. Do you want his number?

does your 10 year old understand the intent of a war though? which answer is it, because i came up with 3 off the top of my head. Understanding a difference is one thing, not having anything to support a claim is another. FW is illegal because why? no reason. It's not in the rules that it's illegal, because, to me at least, the intent of war that Mehul put in the game is not obvious. It is implicit, sure, but new people won't know that. They'll see in the wiki the only thing about war is it's benefits. At that point most people think of the implications of the benefits and profits of war, motivations to go to war, since war is terrible. It is not obvious why war was put into this game. Does your 10 year old know why war was put into this game? That is what the rules speak of, not a difference of a fake and a real.

In the words of Emiya Shirou: There is no reason a fake cannot defeat a real"
^^ just like your post, Bishop, about your 10 year old, this quote has nothing to do with the topic, but it has 'fake' in it, so people might read in whatever they want.