Re: Milking&Fleet Crashing on retirement

#21
Robotron32 wrote:
Sprog wrote:
Zorg wrote:The only way to police such an issue 100% is the implementation of mission history.

But I see that most are against and I do not see a reason to continue this talk further; things can remain as they have been so far; retiring players do what they want with their fleets.

Could you please confirm this applies only to people who will be leaving the game on a perma basis otherwise this ruling would be open to abuse for sure, thanks


What about ninjas hmm? You will never know when someone messed up, or if they are acting like they did. :think:
Or if they claim it was ninja...

Still - if someone wants to pass his fleet on retirement - they can leave it sitting and send PM for location... Or leave it to be shown on lanx and warn someone...

For me only the 2 scenarios I wrote should not be considered milking, as there is chance that someone else will take it - very small chance, but there still is...
Image
All you need is a SickMind and a healty body.
Image

Re: Milking&Fleet Crashing on retirement

#22
Speed Scoreboard wrote:1 Big-Fat-Cow VS Perses 22,114,925,000 0 18,930,870,000 2012-06-15 17:43:10
2 Arthas VS Perses 15,351,585,600 0 13,498,116,960 2012-04-18 23:47:51
3 Big-Fat-Cow VS Perses 15,091,489,500 0 11,629,920,000 2012-06-15 22:32:54
4 Big-Fat-Cow VS Perses 13,142,520,000 0 11,138,555,700 2012-06-15 19:29:31
5 Big-Fat-Cow VS Choke 10,610,944,400 564,811,417 9,440,345,940 2012-04-27 17:27:32
6 Big-Fat-Cow VS Perses 8,375,127,800 0 6,501,617,280 2012-06-15 20:26:56

yah now we just have this tainted scoreboard...
Image

Re: Milking&Fleet Crashing on retirement

#24
Joshanddrew wrote:
Speed Scoreboard wrote:1 Big-Fat-Cow VS Perses 22,114,925,000 0 18,930,870,000 2012-06-15 17:43:10
2 Arthas VS Perses 15,351,585,600 0 13,498,116,960 2012-04-18 23:47:51
3 Big-Fat-Cow VS Perses 15,091,489,500 0 11,629,920,000 2012-06-15 22:32:54
4 Big-Fat-Cow VS Perses 13,142,520,000 0 11,138,555,700 2012-06-15 19:29:31
5 Big-Fat-Cow VS Choke 10,610,944,400 564,811,417 9,440,345,940 2012-04-27 17:27:32
6 Big-Fat-Cow VS Perses 8,375,127,800 0 6,501,617,280 2012-06-15 20:26:56

yah now we just have this tainted scoreboard...

Funny how the only ones that see this as being tainted are the ones who did not benefit. I believe Zorg has ruled on this matter and sided with the player and not with the whining of a few. Everyone here knows that this has been happening since the first player retired and crashed his fleet into his alliance mates. So what if most of the standings on the scoreboard are of me and Cow. He was a great player and deserved the number one spot. The only reason he did not, was because of another player retiring and suiciding his fleet into me. But, I am wasting my breath trying to explain things to people. No one listened when Gozar crashed a few players and they won't listen now.
_________________
“One mark of a great soldier is that he fight on his own terms or fights not at all.”

― Sun Tzu, The Art of War

Re: Milking&Fleet Crashing on retirement

#25
they/people/others i have not expected this much arrogance from you mega.. anyways big fleet always messes up anyones head...

about the suicides and fleet crashing... we have seen tactical fleet crash categories that was made to suit different types of hits...

so i suppose asking for a seperate ranks for hits that are ... well nothing more than... wait for it... fleet recycles!!

get them out of a real hit and put the other superior ppl (well BIG fleeters') ego be stored there in that thread.

So here is my suggestion...

For each universe create a new ranking that will be for hits that are only for fleet recycles. or are we talking about in game ranking? in that case i dont care much its i would prefer my crashes never ever had been shown in those in game ranking.. in that regard if there is an option for opt out lemme know please.
Barbaric nomad causing P-A-I-N.

Re: Milking&Fleet Crashing on retirement

#26
I see it absolutely clearly as milking. How could you count it any other way? It's the intentional delivery of huge amounts of res to another player. It's the very definition. The alternative is leaving the fleet sit for who ever comes first. Allies have a small advantage even with absolute zero cheating, but most big fleets are going to be taken by one of maybe five players. Why? No conspiracy or foul play. They're smart, geared to crash, active and generally have earned there way to the top. Still, I believe it is the interest of the game as a whole to avoid "rich get richer" policies whenever possible.

I don't know that it's fair for the game operators to step in, unless they simply delete the fleets so no one gets them. However, there is an alternative for players who know they are leaving. Don't go out with a bang. Go out with a butt load of small thuds. Just start working you way through the universe, planet by planet with attack missions withing your legal limit of gifting. It's within the rules so you can even skip players or members of alliances you don't like. Fill those fleet slots and go wild. When you're bored, split 'em up and park them. You can even send waves of RIP's out on extended super slow FS missions.

Oh, and if you are going out with a generous heart, don't forget to beef up your mines and warehouses.

Edit: Mind you I am not talking about any specific incident, only in generalities. I certainly don't think there should be any retroactive punishment. As has been stated several times, this has been standard practice in all uni's for some time. Before Zorg's clarification / ruling it was clearly legal.
Outside the box? What box?

Re: Milking&Fleet Crashing on retirement

#27
in no way you can put this as a wrong thing technically mate.. i applaud your enthusiasm but as far as rules and regulation is concerned the players are getting those res by crashing the fleets. there is a battle involved. so as long as its a battle its not technically milking or pushing in. but... yes there is a but.

between two players moon shotting, the regular practice is if one crashes fleet to get a moon and the other is not collecting return moon shot the res goes back to the attacking player with compensation.

this practice is carried throughout the game and taught as to make a clear understanding of how a player may do milking and what are the measures to avoid it.

if starting players do this from the start.... then giving away fleet is milking.

the fact is.. if you take advantage of someone and scam him for $1 its probably ok...

but hey if u do that at a scale of $1 million you will be dragged to the court and will be found guilty and sentenced as per the crime.

the above is just to say that ... fleeters .. the so called "other" ppl who thinks they are so superior... well news.. you are not playing with moral clear conscience...

there are ppl in game who do play without sucking up others fleet to get bigger.

thats my 2 cents well u million dollar scammers probably wont care for a 2 cent thoughts :)
Barbaric nomad causing P-A-I-N.

Re: Milking&Fleet Crashing on retirement

#28
Okay, let's start the discussion over.

Fundamental unwritten rule: Every account must play for its own benefit.

When you crash your fleet somewhere, you violate this fundamental rule. This is called milking by the rulebook as the milking rule description includes this sort of action. Milking is considered a rule violation and the most common punishment we issue for milking violation (as well as for most rule violations) is permanent ban.

Now, let's try to examine the sub-case which says that I crash my fleet on retirement.

First of all, this is something (as many said) that has been happening since day 1. This however does not mean it is by default right. This also means that any different decision produced by this discussion will not be effective for any past cases but will be effective for this point after.

Secondly, there is a problem only when a big player crashes on another big player. However this does not constitute by itself an unfair action. It would by hypocritical to penalize such an action and not penalize the smaller crashes. It is both morally and technically the same. As someone said, everyone should be able to do what they want with their account. If you happen to have a big account, then you can twist things more and there is no legality for anyone to question this.

The previous results both morally and logically that there should be no problem. However there is and some players feel unfairly treated. Why ?

This happens for a series of reasons. The more pressing one is the theory that 2 or more people can arrange this in order to boost a specific account which will then prevail over the rest. Even more, they may even exchange "shots" in different universes. Even in this case, which is the worst case, this is something that everyone can do as the rule is same for everyone.

So we are only left to judge how good for the game is such an action; how interesting or entertaining. Is it killing the game ?

My opinion on this is that primarily, this is hard to happen. We all know how hard it is to crash your own fleet, let alone if it is a big one. Even if you are going to get something in return, somewhere else, it is a hard action to do.

Number 2, the public opinion about such a case is always heavy. Even if you plan to do such a thing, you know that the rest of players will discover it. So this makes it even harder to take such a decision.

So, by default, this is a rare case. In fact, most of the time it is a true retirement which only needs to happen on a tight point and everyone will then find the opportunity to feel unfairly treated, protest and ultimately nag about how unfair such a practice is. This almost always results in bad admins that do not care for the game, bad admins that let other cheat and bad admins means a bad game.

The truth is that no one ever really believes this but only finds the perfect moment for his way out. It is true that the game grows a lot of tension for everybody, in a point that they prefer to abandon their well built account, take a break of 1 month and then come back from zero.

Finally, there will be some few, rare cases, where some people will plan and execute this. Do we really need to adapt the game on these few cases ?

The answer for us is no. We got relative experiences from other games we have developed and we are generally against many rules and many limits. For us, it is better that if everyone knows this possibility but no one attempts it because they know that the rest will start doing the same.

Ultimately, the community will give the solution and the ZE community is a well structured and mature one which can surely handle such issue and even outcast the very few that will break the rules tranquillity. This is after all the BEST punishment that can be issued to any player.

On our side, except than letting the game flow, we have also took some steps, a long time now, that effectively reduce rage quitting.

We are planning to add manual deletion soon, but this option will need about 7 days to execute from initial decision. This is a tense game which heats up nerves and raises blood pressure. In such cases, when cold blood is absent, a lot of bad decisions can happen and this is where the caring developer should involve.

After all, our primary objective here is not money but activity. This always have been our primary objective since day 1.

Re: Milking&Fleet Crashing on retirement

#29
Then maybe the player who is retiring on a perma basis should send you guys a pm stating his intentions of crashing fleet/retiring then you can delete the account accordingly once they have done this....just in case they "change" their minds ;)

Re: Milking&Fleet Crashing on retirement

#30
This is why zorg your understanding of the game play do not coincide with the rest of the gamers.

you build up your entire argument on rare cases. i will just give you one example.

Gumppy before him zookon before him kilox ... all of them recycled their fleet and gave them to other players...

and funamentally all of the three have taken feeding from other fleeters who gave away their fleets to strengthen their resource and fleet size.

so lemme ask you this... in all things considered if i say gozar (just giving an example that is why i am coining names) still has 5-10K bc that zookon or kilox left running on then u will see how far this milking insidence goes onward with.

the rest which you would account for milking created opportunities for players going bigger and bigger.

so isolated incidents or rare cases they do leave a long and deep mark in the game.

either u take off that milking rule or go and do some brain storm dude!
Barbaric nomad causing P-A-I-N.
cron