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 10:40

DJDeath
"DJ, SSF never stood a chance of taking it. Network never stood a chance of keeping
it. It is the same thing, really."

No it isn't. SSF wasted Jedi members premium time for bogus attacks. On the other hand,
taking a harbour from a one man fleet shouldn't take longer than taking an undefended
harbour. So no ones time wasted. Well, unless, it would take the attacking fleet longer,
but then they shouldn't have declared in the first placed.
The only semi argument is, that HA was delayed be one week, but only if you assume that
rehor would have been alone in defending the harbour. Which I doubt.

"And TNF agrees, by evidence of the bans put in place."

Yeah, because TNFs decision have always been the brightest and most just...

And BTW: How many of the fleets which now took a harbour do you think will stand a chance
against a serious attack? Those fleets shouldn't have taken the harbours then as well...?

  • Re : HA scenario Discussion

    03. 19. 2011 10:28

jhempsrt4
Pyro, I posed those same questions earlier in the thread. No answers.

DJ, SSF never stood a chance of taking it. Network never stood a chance of keeping
it. It is the same thing, really. And TNF agrees, by evidence of the bans put in place.

  • Re : HA scenario Discussion

    03. 19. 2011 10:24

DJDeath
"SSF was clearly trying to annoy Jedi with dummy attacks, and never stood a chance of
taking the harbor. Same with Network, they never stood a chance."


A chance against what, whom? A harbour without a defending fleet? I think I remember a
certain youtube vid showing the harbour being taken by landing and airlift forces...

  • Re : HA scenario Discussion

    03. 19. 2011 10:12

Pyrofiend
"The 30 number is only there to give TNF an objective number to carry out
punishment because it is much harder to punish someone on subjectives. SSF was
clearly trying to annoy Jedi with dummy attacks, and never stood a chance of taking
the harbor. Same with Network, they never stood a chance."

Since the matter is subjective, do you have proof that Rehor wanted to get under
peoples' skins? Since you used the example of TKs being subjective, I'll go with that.
Just like TKing, do you have a ScreenShot of Rehor saying he was attacking London
to be annoying? What if Rehor just wanted to experience attacking a harbor for
once?

  • Re : HA scenario Discussion

    03. 19. 2011 10:01

clemo85
Still waiting on Vicks answer considering he's online (or was):

**On a side note ban alsteins account, he's not contributing as no one can understnad 90% of
his posts. . .

Actually here is yet another PERFECT EXAMPLE. Alstein was banned for abusive behaviour
towards Sindher. Yet Leaderwolf (that is alsteins alternate account) is NOT banned. So why is
rehors account (that is not associated with Network) banned and alstein is free to do as
he wishes on his Leaderwolf account?? And the gossip I've heard he also owns arab_fighters
account (whether that is true or not I do not know).

Implement your rules for everyone and BAN alsteins Lonewolf account, otherwise you are
showing bias towards rehor. **

  • Re : HA scenario Discussion

    03. 19. 2011 09:57

mav2kfk
^.......... like mamma mamma (vick, vick or reporta,reporta) someone TRIES to get
under my skin? (see CAPSLOCK)

i start laughing already.

No one was hurt.
1 week of free production was "payed" and gifted to the attacker on this saturday.
oh, and no-one got under each others skin right?

btw; who reported that whole thing to tnf? i have a guess ...but not sure.

  • Re : HA scenario Discussion

    03. 19. 2011 09:48

jhempsrt4
LMAO @ altsien jr.

Anyway, every rule has gray area. Otherwise, we would all be banned all the time.
We aren't allowed to TK people, but we all are guilty of it every time someone
crosses us when we fire. We don't get banned because it is an accident, not a
malicious attack.

The 30 number is only there to give TNF an objective number to carry out
punishment because it is much harder to punish someone on subjectives. SSF was
clearly trying to annoy Jedi with dummy attacks, and never stood a chance of taking
the harbor. Same with Network, they never stood a chance.

And I can garuntee that trying to get under peoples skin will get you banned.

  • Re : HA scenario Discussion

    03. 19. 2011 09:46

V2CxBongRipz
"What makes you so sure, that only rehor would have been there to defend London? I bet
there would have been quite a few people who would have joined up with Network, just to
surprise the attacking fleet. And if not, taking the harbour from one guy wouldn't take
any longer than taking it while it wasn't defended. "

I would have joined for lolz if given the chance. :D

"In the eyes of Vick11 and the way in which the rule is being imposed, TTF should have
their fleet leader banned and fleet disbanded. The rule does not state anything about your
TTF example, my 7th example (which really happened) or the current situation with network,
yet it is being used."

Im willing to bet we would have been warned like the rules state rather then outright
banned. If we were banned however would our entire leadership been banned? Would the
untagged accounts of those leaders have been banned? Then again I like to think no one
would have even filed a complaint against us.

  • Re : HA scenario Discussion

    03. 19. 2011 09:43

DJDeath
"I wonder why nobody stopped and think the other way around?

The one man fleet "Network" didn't waste anybody's time atacking an empty harbor,
but what about the fleet that is obligated to waste his time atacking a 1-man fleet?

If he didn't attack the empty harbor, another larger fleet would have declared and we
would be getting a real HA this week at london. But instead fawk will start the process
of FFFFFictory his way into the harbor this week instead of last week.

Point is, Network fleet delayed HA for 1 week."

What makes you so sure, that only rehor would have been there to defend London? I bet
there would have been quite a few people who would have joined up with Network, just to
surprise the attacking fleet. And if not, taking the harbour from one guy wouldn't take
any longer than taking it while it wasn't defended.

  • Re : HA scenario Discussion

    03. 19. 2011 09:26

clemo85
@V2CxBongRipz

In the eyes of Vick11 and the way in which the rule is being imposed, TTF should have
their fleet leader banned and fleet disbanded. The rule does not state anything about your
TTF example, my 7th example (which really happened) or the current situation with network,
yet it is being used.

On a side note ban alsteins account, he's not contributing as no one can understnad 90% of
his posts. . .

Actually here is yet another PERFECT EXAMPLE. Alstein was banned for abusive behaviour
towards Sindher. Yet Leaderwolf (that is alsteins alternate account) is NOT banned. So why is
rehors account (that is not associated with Network) banned and alstein is free to do as
he wishes on his Leaderwolf account?? And the gossip I've heard he also owns arab_fighters
account (whether that is true or not I do not know).

Implement your rules for everyone and BAN alsteins Lonewolf account, otherwise you are
showing bias towards rehor.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next Last