Community - Forum - View old data

Categories :  

General Discussion

  Index

  • HA scenario Discussion

    03. 18. 2011 02:15

Elliot2lazy
Since a lot of people are talking about HA related Banning things I was thinking of a
scenario that could of easily happened on either server. Here it goes...

Say Fleet A takes a harbor that is undefended from when Harbor Assaults started back
up.Fleet A has about 40-50 members when they attack.

Then next week's declaration Fleet B attacks Fleet A. Fleet B has 20 members when they
declared and still has less than 30 when they do the Harbor Assault.

Fleet A has now about 60ish members when this Harbor Assault goes on, but they only have
16 accounts that are BB5/CV5+ and of those they only have 7 that are either CV6 or BB6.
Most players in the fleet are Blitz players or just starting to get out of blitz.

Fleet B has 16 accounts that are BB5/CV5+ and 7 of those accounts have a CV6 or BB6, and
Fleet B has multiple BB6's and/or BB6,CV6 combination on one account. Where Fleet A
doesn't have any multiples at all. Also on average Fleet B has higher level accounts than
Fleet A. Therefore Fleet B has more 120 crews and ships, but they are still under 30 people.

Now Discuss would this be a bannable offense for wasting time, or would this be a
reasonable HA since, it is about fair number of players (accounts) with high level crews?
  Index

  • Re : HA scenario Discussion

    03. 19. 2011 21:00

captjade
"Questioning-Refusal-Release-Intimidation-Tension Reduction" i see the first four but not
the last one guess that will happen on Sunday when everyone's happy this is all behind
us.. or at least i hope :P

  • Re : HA scenario Discussion

    03. 19. 2011 19:07

jhempsrt4
I wish test server discussion would get this much action.

  • Re : HA scenario Discussion

    03. 19. 2011 18:15

brimal_rage
why does that rule even apply to an obviously fake HA that doesnt effect anything since
TNF isnt a viable HA fleet?

  • Re : HA scenario Discussion

    03. 19. 2011 17:47

Hetekroket
Lol Clemo, you nub, you should know by now that hard questions get ignored...

"Fresh Eyes"

  • Re : HA scenario Discussion

    03. 19. 2011 17:17

clemo85
I'm still waiting on an answer as to why alsteins alternate account is still
unbanned? It is the same person yet the account is free to do as it wishes (with
alstein controlling it).

Ban alsteins alternate account or my faith in TNF will die completely, if a PERSON is to
be banned for an offence and not an INDIVIDUAL ACCOUNT (as with rehor) do the
same thing to alstein that has happened to rehor.

*I'm so glad alstein had to butt in to prove one of my points!*
**Caps used as text colour cannot be altered to my knowledge**

  • Re : HA scenario Discussion

    03. 19. 2011 16:13

Elliot2lazy
Yes I am sure most of us are curious as to Altsein's second account is able to be used but
yet the rehor account is banned.

It is like the simple analogy if a referee/official/umpire in a sport calls something one
way all game, he/she cannot just change his/her mind at the end, but yet people still do
it and get away with it as if they were trying to rig the game. Not saying Vick is rigging
the game, just asking for consistency in why/how bans are given for the same grey areas of
so called broken rules.

  • Re : HA scenario Discussion

    03. 19. 2011 12:10

Sindher
This thread is hilarious. Here we are discussing why the Rehor account was banned when it's just an alt account, and
Altsein can post from his alt while he's banned.


"Personal Feelings" - Vick11

  • Re : HA scenario Discussion

    03. 19. 2011 11:38

Gtdawg
People are improperly focusing on just the number instead of looking at the intent of
the rule.

The rule is intended to stop pointless attacks that have no chance of success.

Within all metrics, Rehor's HA assault was successful.

  • Re : HA scenario Discussion

    03. 19. 2011 11:34

DJDeath
See, this is all speculation. I wouldn't put it past rehor to get 20+ people together for
a defense. Just because they're not saying so on this forum doesn't mean they don't exist.
On the other hand, it is entirely possible for a fleet like FAWK to show up with less than
30 people for a defense. So what I'm trying to say here is, that being able to defend the
harbour shouldn't factor in this situation. All that should are the facts at hand:

Was someone directly hurt? No.
Was the attack succesful? Yes.
Did rehor break any rules? Depends. The rule is taylored to a special occasion and poorly
worded and thought out.
Does rehor's action warrant a seven day ban of multiple accounts? No.

As for rehors intentions, nobody knows but rehor. From my point a view, this action was a
good laugh. But as with many good laughs, you will always find people who'll be offended.

  • Re : HA scenario Discussion

    03. 19. 2011 10:57

jhempsrt4
DJ, I never said that TNF was perfect, in, I said they weren't perfect earlier in the
thread. And to my knowledge, no one has made the argument that Network would
even put up a token resistance to even the smallest of fleets. I think I have only
seen maybe 3 or 4 people say they would help him. That is a far cry from 20+
member fleets. On top of that, no one but Faraz has defended Rehors intent in this
thread or any others that I have noticed.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next Last