SWEA Vs Crownless AMA

[Bishop]

There is no 'standard punishment'. FREE reported a fake war, both kingdoms got immediately kicked out into normal stance and some provs were deleted.

Not by me they weren't.

No, you said its standard if the war win was needed for a crown. Not the same. I am a unique snowflake, and you are a BIAS admin who plays the same game you ban people in.

Kds that have tried to fix war for war win crown has had their wins reset, whether they were number 1 or number 5 or if they needed that extra win or not. You were treated no differently.

[Araqiel]

what would've been fair was to not ****play allies and force known resetters to farm out to spite you

Say something useful and I might just consider giving you some attention.

[Bishop]

He has no justification for his actions. He was bias towards STRIPPERS because of our actions towards his ghetto all age, plain and simple.

I've tried to be reasonable about this and show that you were treated the same as the other kingdoms, but you keep spouting this claim of bias. You have exhausted my patience. Do not post in this thread again.

[Araqiel]

Not by me they weren't.

You didn't deal with the SWEA / PEW situation and the game devs have no idea about context when these problems arise. It would be more useful to everyone if you were the one calling the shots.

And you are completely ignoring the main problem here. What is the standard punishment for being involved in a fake war? There shouldn't have to be any context to this rule break. There should be solid rules. If you are involved in a fake war in any way, then x happens.

This will stop people being felt ****ed over, and avoid huge threads like this.

[American Badass]

"Changes to this Agreement and the Game

We reserve the right to modify this Agreement and any aspect of the Game, with or without prior notice. Your continued use of the Game following any revision to this Agreement constitutes your complete and irrevocable acceptance of any and all such changes. "

This rule here that you accept when you play basically means admin do not even have to disclose reasons why. The problem with making rules so specific is then people will try to bend them and quote the rules when it is punished just like they currently do with CFs.

[Araqiel]

"Changes to this Agreement and the Game

We reserve the right to modify this Agreement and any aspect of the Game, with or without prior notice. Your continued use of the Game following any revision to this Agreement constitutes your complete and irrevocable acceptance of any and all such changes. "

This rule here that you accept when you play basically means admin do not even have to disclose reasons why. The problem with making rules so specific is then people will try to bend them and quote the rules when it is punished just like they currently do with CFs.

The problem is the admins treat people differently because there are no rules regarding fake wars.

[Lurking Ghost]

You can be reasonable when you don't play the same game you ban people in. Then people wont be able to accuse you of being bias.

Never have I heard of a legit sport/game where the ref/admin is allowed to play along with us common folk.

Oh come on, now you re being silly. One can say a lot about Bishop, but as far as I know he isn't getting paid to do this.
Should he devote all his time to this, and not be able to do anything except banning ppl ?

This isn't a game of money, or a multi billion sport. If things go wrong, the consequeces are a few ppl getting mad.

[Lurking Ghost]

The problem is the admins treat people differently because there are no rules regarding fake wars.

The problem is that the devs should develop game mechanics so that fw aren't needed at all, and develop more ways of getting strategy into the game.

[neanderthal]

The problem is the admins treat people differently because there are no rules regarding fake wars.

They own it. They can do whatever the hell they want. Be happy that its running and appreciate the game more.

[American Badass]

The problem is the admins treat people differently because there are no rules regarding fake wars.

Is your sig in reference to the thing after "The chase?" on itv?

Well I have always know Bishop will not accept word of mouth as evidence. I have had logs in the past that put certain people in trouble and he said they could not and will not be used. Even if 99% it looks/sounds fake he does not do anything. In regards to Strppiers their kings were stupid enough to do the deals via in game forums. SWEA on paper it looks like they had no involvement. Thus the war was suspended and neither side gained the war win. NOW early age if this took place it would put that kingdom back to be stuck in EOWCF for 2 days. I am 100% sure that punishments before people have been suspended and remained in EOWCF and were not chucked out right away. The fact SWEA did not 100% put them into doing something wrong, they could not be suspended. Pew however WAS. They were hitting out of war and gave impression they had no means to fight.

This could have been a plan from AMA to make pew enter a war with SWEA and hit out so it looked fake so both got reset / deleted and / or SWEA suspended and chucked out of war for AMA to farm for 48 hours. With no solid proof... how would this have been fair on SWEA?

[Korp]

Its funny that the two biggest haters against SWEA in here is one from a dealbreaking cheating kd and the other one played in AMA last age so he got ****played (probably upset cause he lost his only chance to crown) :(

[Araqiel]

Its funny that the two biggest haters against SWEA in here is one from a dealbreaking cheating kd and the other one played in AMA last age so he got ****played (probably upset cause he lost his only chance to crown) :(

I wouldn't go as far to say I hate SWEA. I am not moaning about SWEA, I am complaining about the ****ty inconstant admin decisions.

[Korp]

I wouldn't go as far to say I hate SWEA. I am not moaning about SWEA, I am complaining about the ****ty inconstant admin decisions.

You are moaning that SWEA got off clean (as they werent cheating) and Debauchery got punished cause they were cheating :)

[American Badass]

I wouldn't go as far to say I hate SWEA. I am not moaning about SWEA, I am complaining about the ****ty inconstant admin decisions.

You are moaning that SWEA got off clean (as they werent cheating) and Debauchery got punished cause they were cheating :)

It is clear you were using the game mechanics to your advantage and even when I told Bishop I had logs to put both SWEA / Pew in the **** i was told IRC conversations is not proof etc (I had a change in heart and was actually against going against honorable play to win)

[Elit]

Its funny that the two biggest haters against SWEA in here is one from a dealbreaking cheating kd and the other one played in AMA last age so he got ****played (probably upset cause he lost his only chance to crown) :(

Im not sure about how much ppl "hate SWEA" but im not from them. You don't deserve my hate :P
Im more curios are SWEA is going to win at least 1 clean war vs any decent WW kds. Need to alarm you WW kds are danger too.