#2 province grande mucca deleted

[Landro]

Running to an easier war is not running to a FW. And tone it down or I'll just remove you from this conversation.

I have a feeling that you were personally involved in this war. Be careful about (ab)using your mod powers in such a discussion.

[Topsy]

Your claim that he is "guilty by association" doesn't really make sense. All the people in Ryan's KD were complicit in the other monarch farming land, are they "guilty by association" for allowing it when they attacked in and moved the meter?

Just because Ryan "looks" like the person who went in with the intention of a fake war(seeing as he is a bank in a ghetto), doesn't mean he did what that person did(enter into what may be construed as a fake war).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_fallacy

[Realest]

Well Topsy, how do you know that their kingdom was in on the whole thing? Since you are privy to this information somehow, I'd strongly suggest reporting it to the mods so they can take action on it. Unless ofc you are assuming. Nice try though, stop trying to take shots at me. You are only qualified to supersize my combos.

One can easily contend a monarch dictates his kingdom's path, so it logically follows a kingdom was following orders that can be easily manipulated. Notice how the kings of the respective kingdoms got deleted. That was your obvious clue there, detective dip****.

[Topsy]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kwJe1...eature=related

[KuhaN]

For all the people arguing this deletion is wrong, answer these questions: 1. what makes u think the devs know what a nap is? 2. if Mehul was still the owner, what makes u think he knows what a nap is? 3. If a 25 player kd was "warring" another 25 player kd, and 24 out of the 25 players napped with 24 players from the other kd, would it still be a legit war if only two people were warring?. The bottomline is this: if people are napping with other players while in a war, they are doing it at a risk. Stop making things complicated, in the devs eyes this is simple fake warring, and I agree 100 hundred percent. Lastly, nobody cares about the past DHaran..... /thread.

[fariz]

Kuhan! go back to the GYM! :D

[Bishop]

This is how the rules are, and if i see a thief using war to whore it up, i will report him for being in a fake war, as that is the definition of fake war now by your own admission Bishop. Same goes for mages and banks. You simply arbitrarily made the rules and enforce them. I will file the reports for you to unleash your deletion happy fingers, you need not think anymore than you currently do (on a scale of 1 to 10, i surmise it's a 0), for I will do the thinking for you and unleash a well written report on my cheaters report to you on how this guy or girl is in a fake war which is an abhorrent use of wars and their kingdom to make a fake war with the sole reason of gaining for themselves.

^^ initial post by you

It's not abuse if they're in a fake war. You define the fake war, I honestly don't understand why you're saying you will be a hypocrite about the definition of fake wars and the actions you will take against them when I say that I will help you out in your and the server's crusade to rid the world of fake wars, by your definition of fake and war.

"Abuse is the improper usage or treatment for a bad purpose"
There is nothing improper for reporting cheaters, as that's what they are, and there is no bad purpose, it's an unholy crusade to rid the world of cheating. It's what we all fair players want; no cheaters. You're really a child, Bishop, to define in this thread what fake wars are then to tell me you will delete me if I give you work to rid us of people abusing the system and having fake wars, cheating.

Nuriho, nowhere was it said that a thief doing ops in war was considered fake. If you persist in this asinine behaviour you will be removed. You will not get another warning.

[veritas]

except the orc ryan fought fully admitted he was ducking with a FW. This makes Ryan an accessory to the crime. It's not about the naps. Use logic, dont be an emotional *****.

The naps are at the core of this issue. You can list a number of situations where running to war for protection would be perfectly legit. It's pretty safe to assume that a province of astaraels or grande muccas size would be safe fram hits in most of the wars they enter against other ghettos. If astaraels kd would have been waved by some random kd and astarael had hit the button to avoid the conflict with force, it would have been perfectly legit.

The problem here concerns the (cow) nap between the two monarchs. Im not arguing for or against the decision to ban the use of cow naps in war. Problem here is that these kind if diplomatic agreements have always been considered legit and banning Ryan without first clearly stating this change in policy could be considered harsh and rather disrespectful towards the player base.

[DHaran]

I have a feeling that you were personally involved in this war. Be careful about (ab)using your mod powers in such a discussion.

Not sure how you came to that fail conclusion, I had no part in this war whatsoever. I don't even really know Ryan very well. Regardless, just because I'm in the conversation doesn't mean I will allow anyone to break forum rules, so there would be nothing abusive about it.

i think you need to improve your reading comprehension skills. he clearly said he went to war to avoid problematic confrontations.

The guy is obviously a litte bit nub, he doesn't understand that what he did is common, and wasn't violating any known rules.

For all the people arguing this deletion is wrong, answer these questions: 1. what makes u think the devs know what a nap is? 2. if Mehul was still the owner, what makes u think he knows what a nap is? 3. If a 25 player kd was "warring" another 25 player kd, and 24 out of the 25 players napped with 24 players from the other kd, would it still be a legit war if only two people were warring?. The bottomline is this: if people are napping with other players while in a war, they are doing it at a risk. Stop making things complicated, in the devs eyes this is simple fake warring, and I agree 100 hundred percent. Lastly, nobody cares about the past DHaran..... /thread.

The 24 player NAP argument doesn't apply whatsoever, because nobody was sitting out this war. Everyone was participating. Cow NAPs and Fake Wars are not, and have never been, under the same category. Ignoring the past would be idiocy, since that is our only frame of reference.

[Bishop]

The 24 player NAP argument doesn't apply whatsoever, because nobody was sitting out this war. Everyone was participating. Cow NAPs and Fake Wars are not, and have never been, under the same category. Ignoring the past would be idiocy, since that is our only frame of reference.

You really don't get it do you? It doesn't matter if you think it doesn't apply. It does.

[DHaran]

You really don't get it do you? It doesn't matter if you think it doesn't apply. It does.

lol no YOU don't get it. If there were 2 provinces not participating in the war, I can see your argument that it was a FW. That is not the case here. You essentially want to choose their war targets for them, this simple fact is absolutely unacceptable. Why would Ryan train up to hit the guy when he could just 4-tap others? And who says he wasn't going to hit the guy anyway? Now whatever words we use to trick a ghetto into a war can get us deleted? Is any of this getting through to you?

I already covered a more suitable 24 prov NAP scenario, which you thought would be ok:

<DHaran> i can go to an extreme too, what if each prov only agreed to hit a corresponding prov in enemy kds, so all 25 provs in both kds are trading hits, thats a FW?
<Bishop> hmmmm
<Bishop> i dunno, i suspect it would eb ok

Can you explain why you think it's ok to NAP 24 provs this way, but not ok to NAP one?

[Anri]

GL DHaran... Ever tried talking to a wall before?

[Bishop]

Anri is correct. Our position will not change on this.

<Bishop> hmmmm
<Bishop> i dunno, i suspect it would eb ok
^^ hardly a resounding confirmation.

"And who says he wasn't going to hit the guy anyway?"
^^ Ryan.

[Purplehaze]

This being the first age Fake wars have been banned, the rules on it are definately not clear enough obviously. When you have a cow in a small kingdom their are very few options on war targets. Just because two cows agree not to hit each other does not make it a fake war when both kingdoms are actively attacking into eachother, chaining, max acre hitting, etc... Were in the rules does it say this is not allowed? Why would the Cow kingdoms even bother going to war with eachother if they beleived they would get deleted for something like this, it is a grey area in which maybe the Utopian Heads felt they did not agree with, in which case their should have been temporary suspension with a reason, not some harsh deletions. Two Cows going to war just to smash eachother completely goes against their goals as a cow for the age, which is superior growth and competition amongst the top charts, not getting into a brutal blood bath with another Cow just to waste eachothers time and possibly loose a lot of hard work. Even if one Cow was stronger then the other, then their would have NEVER been a war in the first place if their wasn't an agreement for the two of them to not hit eachother.

If this really gave Ryan an unfair edge to take the number 1 spot then let the other top kigndoms and top players be the ones to decide that, I'm sure they would have had their say to stop the BS or they would hit Ryan out of his spot if they felt it wasn't a fair move towards Ryan obtaining his growth and if it effected their chances at taking the Crown or making a Top 5 province themselves, etc..

Either way, it seems as if both kingdoms at war were excited and happy to finally get a FUN war.. why take that away? If personal Prov Naps are not going to be allowed then that is fine if that is what the utopian heads want to do... but it wasn't clear this age and both Players should not have gotten deleted and have their age flushed down the crapper for a grey area!

[DHaran]

Anri is correct. Our position will not change on this.

Your position is wrong. You are taking the stance that any 2 UBs in a war not doing anything should get deleted for FWing, that is the fundamental truth here.

Even if this is the position of the devs, you were completely wrong to delete them for something that is not known as a FW. It's like making up a rule and deleting people for it without telling them what the rule is. It's a terrible way to handle it.