Anything interesting happening?

[Korp]

Korp -- not only did he not action it, he said there was no problem with it. http://forums.utopia-game.com/showth...-exploit/page2

I was refering to when you abused game mechanics while you explored your provs. It was deemed as abuse later on by Bishop but it wasnt acted upon. And I think you are trying to read into too much into it, resetting your prov isnt against the rules but abusing the rest function is. Ie, you used a legal function in a way it was not intended. Anyway, i think its all pretty crystal clear.

[TommyB]

I think that the issue we have is that Bishop implemented a mechanic so that resetting couldn't be abused (without announcing it), but then decided that resetting STILL constituted abuse, in spite of the mechanic he put in place to balance it. That's the issue. If there wasn't a mechanic in place to balance it (no 24h window before you can reset after sending aid), you could argue it was abusing a game mechanic. The issue is that a mechanic was designed specifically to prevent abuse, and they just decided that it still constituted abuse.

The problem with this argument is that your guys basically admitted already that the balancing mechanic took them by surprise. Now you admit that without that mechanic it would be abuse of game mechanics. Do you see the issue with trying to pretend that your intention was not abusing game mechanics to get an unfair advantage?

[Palem]

Palem -- the reset function has a cooldown on it so you can't aid out and then reset. We aided out and then reset 24 hours later, per the game mechanics. I don't see how that's an abuse of the reset function since there is an explicit cooldown if you aid.

You're implying that as long as you don't break the mechanics you can't abuse them...that's clearly false.

Remember when csarmi used the EoW to have his army insta-return so he could 8-tap? Everything he did was clearly within the mechanics of the game, but clearly he was abusing the purpose of the mechanics. Likewise, you guys were abusing the purpose the mechanics in play here. The cooldown exists to try to deter people abusing using the reset function as a means to gaining resources without much cost.

I don't see how it's different from using reset to slay/send dragons, which Bishop said was legit last age. What I take issue with is the lack of clarity -- if we send aid, are we then never allowed to reset those provinces? Clearly I can't reset them when the mechanics allow me to, so when is it ok?

I would say (and not being support, my opinion is irrelevant, but just as an unbiased observer) it's ok when it's not causing some clear conflict with other game mechanics that are clearly defined. When you completely eliminate the risk of having provinces do nothing but accumulate resources and aid them out to other provinces because they're just going to reset anyway, that isn't a strategical move. It's just abusing mechanics completely in your favor

Don't get me wrong. I understand pushing the game mechanics to their limits to get every advantage you can muster. I can even respect it when it comes to stretching like the actual gameplay mechanics because it requires an insight to the mechanics that other's haven't explored. However there's something very wrong with abusing mechanics like the reset button. The only way to completely remove any potential for it's abuse is just to remove it, and that hurts the entire rest of the game that isn't abusing it and actually using it for it's good purpose. The fact that you'd insist on it's removal all because a small group of players can't just agree that it has a clear purpose and just accept that abusing it leads to punishment is incredibly selfish and a damn shame.

[skoyl12]

So if i got this right you aided out from one province then noticed that when you aid out you get a 24h aggression timer so you already gimped your kd and then the smartest player on server decided to do it on second province :)

[Godly]

Palem, I never said it would be abuse. Zauper's argument is that you would have a better case if it werent fixed. That's not my opinion. I think you have no argument either way. If I thought this was genuine abuse, I wouldn't have done it:

We have an entire thread from Bishop last round stating it wasn't (http://forums.utopia-game.com/showth...ential-exploit). Drixx even made suggestions on how to fix the problem in that thread and it looks like they implemented his suggestion without telling anyone. If you present the idea and the admin says it isnt a problem, make suggestions on how to fix it and are ignored, how on earth can you be actioned for doing it the next round?

"Get someone else to razekill them for crappy tactics. Is another kingdom killing off their provs for them?" -Bishop
"No i am not suggesting you kill off your own members, get people to raze them for crappy tactics." -Bishop

"This needs to get fixed. They should stay dead til war is over." - Anri
"No, they shouldn't. Aid should incur a block at a minimum and possibly a further war delay. You should make a a thread in suggestions if you want to be considered though." -Bishop

"could admin access and validate the reported kingdom's forum, and act accordingly? In war too or else can give a hand." -sktoh
"Validate for what? Its not a rule violation to respawn." -Bishop

Yeah. We're way off base for doing it this round. We reviewed this thread before selecting this strategy. If he isn't going to do anything about it and says it's ok, wtf shouldn't we?

I really, really feel like we have been scammed. It was bad enough that no mention of a fix was made to make this a poor strat, but on top of that action it by going into people's provs and releasing random stuff? Seriously!?

So if i got this right you aided out from one province then noticed that when you aid out you get a 24h aggression timer so you already gimped your kd and then the smartest player on server decided to do it on second province :)

Once you're at the point of having a prov OOP with no military, you don't have much choice. Just gotta accept the 24 hr penalty. At that point we had no clue it was actually a 5 day penalty.

[Procy]

I refuse to play a strategy game in which the only strategy is what the admin deems is acceptable.

Do you even game bro?

I'm not even trolling here. Do you not play games or something? Admins decide what is and isn't acceptable for their games. If you don't like it. Tough ****.

[Bishop]

Theres no point quoting me on a different scenario that occurred last age,especially when i know your own kingdommates thought it was abuse.

[Elldallan]

Sending aid and deleting (or now, resetting) has been in the game forever. It's an expected action for someone to take when they're quitting (or changing what they want to play). Bishop has now decided that sending aid is a hostile action for the purpose of those (and I suspect VM as well).

Thats a pretty isolated case and it's one province sending stuff, not an entire kingdomcooperating to abuse the fact that you get free soldiers from resetting. At least in the case of Rage who seemingly explored the provinces the provinces they intended to reset 1 acre(to move the explorers below median) and then have all the non-explorers send all their resources to the explorers and then reset.

In the case of Havoc it seems a little less clear cut but the fact that your provinces chose to reset rather than abandon/delete/defect seems to indicate that it was intentional abuse of the fact that you'd get free resources.

Changing the mechanics mid game is fine. Going into a person's prov and selecting what you want to remove from them based on what you find to be reasonable punishment is unprecedented.

No changing a major mechanic mid age is not fine, it's absurdly unbalanced in the case of patching a loophole unless you punish(delete) everybody that abused it up to that point(for example exploration bug last age)
In most cases mechanics should never be changed mid age, and in the case of a change that "improves" how something works it should absolutely never be changed mid-age, an excellent example of why it's bad was when Bishop "fixed" honor mid age and completely broke honor gains beyond anything that was even remotely of this world(two kingdoms created ~50 princes in a war that lasted a little bit more than mintime).

Well looking at history the typical precedent for almost any type of cheating would be deletion, but if Pyro had already been adversely affected by your abuse then it's reasonable to let them recoup their losses.

[Godly]

Theres no point quoting me on a different scenario that occurred last age,especially when i know your own kingdommates thought it was abuse.

There's no point to any of this tbh since I know you won't change your mind. Just venting and explaining my POV. Like there is 0% chance I would have done this if I knew there was the code change or it would be actioned. I just wish we had that communication.

[jelloshots]

would it be too much to ask to have things like bug fixes included in the age patch notes? if there had been a line with something along the lines of "Fixed a bug where people could send aid immediately oop and reset. Aid now counts as a hostile action for the purposes of resetting." then there would be no question about whether it's a good idea to do it anyway (because now it's not). I think the lack of consistency and communication is what upsets people more than the details or the target.

Also, could we submit a list of things that *might* be considered abuse and have you answer definitively for a given age whether each of those things will be considered abuse and actionable?

[faegan]

He basically entrapped us by making the coding change and not informing utopia

He doesn't have to inform anyone of anything.

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.



Spirit of the Rules
Players attempting to manipulate rules and quirks of the game in ways obviously not intended may be subject to deletion. Because of their nature, these types of circumstances are considered on a case-by-case basis. Users should avoid actions they believe are against the spirit and intent of the game.

Every kingdom in utopia abuses mechanics. Do you inform Bishop when race X is OP? No. You pick it and own the server. Is it against the spirit of the rules of the game when you get GBP to feed a cow to be UB by 100% of utopia? Based on the very loose definition of spirit of the rules (i.e. whatever Bishop feels like today), YES. The INTENT of GBP is to protect beaten down provs, not exploit it purposely to grow cows. Yet, it's been done. It's never been actioned.

A lot of murderers never get caught and some that do, get away with it due to legal ****ups or what not or get small punishment. So does that make murder ok? Great reasoning that...

2 rounds ago we had a crown winner based on abusing of war mechanics. 3 rounds ago we had a crown winner based on abusing of war mechanics.

One could argue that last age's winner was also abusing exploration mechanics, but you cleverly let that one out eh?

Last round, a kingdom complained of people resetting their chained provs in war to have them come back after 24 hrs of protection in great shape. Bishop's response? Get people from outside to raze them.

I agree with you here, Godly. I would have voted for 25 province deletion.

Wake up, people. This isn't about abusing bugs. This is about Bishop's power trip. He's pissed off that he made a stupid change and people figured out how to break it. If you just want the noobs to play utopia who can't figure this stuff out, just say so. But last I counted, utopia is down to 20 kingdoms with 25 players. You may blame advertising. I blame you.

I blame people with bloated ego's that think they're smarter than 99% of the other players.

Current list of punishment for using a tactic that is not a bug abuse and therefore not cheating:
- The entire tactic foiled by a coding change not mentioned in the changelist: our provs arent in functioning state for 5 real days (24 hrs in initial protection + 24 hrs waiting since aid is now a hostile action + 72 hrs for protection on new provs). This should be punishment enough.

See above. Admin's can change the game whenever they want. Severity of punishment would depend on the mood of the judge/executioner on duty: Bishop. There is no Utopian Book of Punishment where it says what is "enough" punishment. I'd say that given the reputation of most players in CR, they could count as rolemodels for other kingdoms. Considering that, I would punish more severe because it would give the wrong idea to kingdoms that look up to CR. Also, abusing game mechanics or spirit of the game could be reason for deletion....

- All leaders who reset suspended for 72 hrs

That's harsh, but then again, he could have just deleted you.

- More military released than what was aided (military paid for with real cash).

Evidence exhibit A: you paid to build more military. This is in violation of the Spirit of the Rules.

- Still negative TB on the provs that got aided
- Total of 7 provs taken out of a war for a measly 8k soldiers

Why bother if it was for a measly 8k soldiers? Seems to me that you REALLY wanted those 8k soldiers. If you don't need them, why reset? Above you stated that you reset and bought more military....

- Loss of 2 reset credits purchased with real money that weren't used how we wanted them to be used. (This should be refunded).

Say what? You mis-spent credits? So, what if I set a sitter for 4 days and then decide oops...I didn't need it? Do I get a refund because they weren't used how I wanted them to be used? You made a choice to use them to buy more military, which is in violation of rules. Too bad, wrong choice.

Now, let's fight in-game! It's a close war still and many compliments to CR for this!

[faegan]

Bishop are you kidding me? Had you told us what the change was, do you think anyone would have done it? This is entrapment, plain and simple. Do you think losing 2 provs for 5 days is worth those resources? You are chart shaping. Pyro got caught with a crappy strategy and are being rewarded DOUBLE for it.

If you had just waved a random ghetto, PyroManiaCs wouldn't have been rewarded. YOU decided who would benefit.

[StratOcastle]

Moral compass is a good system to avoid abuse. I'll reiterate, it's a matter of what hurts the game. If the mechanic lays waste to skill and activity it discourages both old and new players. If a strong kingdom like Rusty gets dragged into a quagmire that strains player enjoyment then you must see the consequence is possible exodus. This along with the mudslinging in forum was distasteful.
The problem with clarity on abuse is then the system is analyzed for 'as lame as you can get' tactics. Come on. Everyone involved here should be at a skill level of crowning anyway. I get that some were prepared to say how easy this game is, when it was already common knowledge. It's been said before to 'just let them crown while the rest of us play Utopia'.

[faegan]

Sending aid and deleting (or now, resetting) has been in the game forever. It's an expected action for someone to take when they're quitting (or changing what they want to play). Bishop has now decided that sending aid is a hostile action for the purpose of those (and I suspect VM as well).

Last age it was not abuse of resetting to do it to fund/slay dragons though, interestingly.

I think that the issue we have is that Bishop implemented a mechanic so that resetting couldn't be abused (without announcing it), but then decided that resetting STILL constituted abuse, in spite of the mechanic he put in place to balance it. That's the issue. If there wasn't a mechanic in place to balance it (no 24h window before you can reset after sending aid), you could argue it was abusing a game mechanic. The issue is that a mechanic was designed specifically to prevent abuse, and they just decided that it still constituted abuse.

If resetting is the problem, why not remove resetting? Aid can't be the problem, people send aid then reset or abandon all the time. (Bishop didn't action me last age when snaggletooth sent ~2mil gc and some soldiers in aid and then abandoned!)

It's the lack of consistency. Some game mechanics are 'ok' to abuse (mass sending soldiers to win provnw [this is legal so long as you don't use vacation, which is an interesting difference], hiding in vacation to win provland) as some examples in the last few ages. Or dropping NW to declare war, dropping NW to get better gains -- those are not only ok, but encouraged game mechanics for us to abuse. What exactly distinguishes abusing NW mechanics from abusing reset mechanics? Honestly, what is the difference between what Bishop said was ok last age (resetting crappy provs to get stronger provs during war) and what we did (resetting crappy provs to get stronger provs)?

Will we be actioned for homes pumping? What about soldier swapping, is that an abuse of EOW mechanics?

Here's another example -- Two or three ages ago, I asked Bishop about cow NAPs in war. He told me that if you agreed to a cow NAP before a war began, it would be ok (agreeing not to hit certain provs) -- this was when strippers / pew2 were warring with one agreed, but if you agreed to one during the war, it would not be. The age before he had actioned strippers for making a similar deal, and the two ages later he would have no problem with a full CF agreed to during war between RBL/AMA except for some agreed hits before WD -- something that I have been told a number of times would explicitly be FW, and thus actionable (because it extends war protection to allow folks to train safely).

I think the issue isn't the indiviual resetting or aiding, but the combination of the two and the fact that you paid for this advantage.

[flogger]

Godly, talking a lot doesn't make you any less of a cheater