Please look at the following partial CR summaries.

The defender has won the battle !
The attacker has lost a total of 16.785.000 units.
The defender has lost a total of 812.137.500 units.

The defender has won the battle !
The attacker has lost a total of 16.785.000 units.
The defender has lost a total of 558.335.000 units.

The defender has won the battle !
The attacker has lost a total of 16.785.000 units.
The defender has lost a total of 367.432.000 units.

The defender has won the battle !
The attacker has lost a total of 16.785.000 units.
The defender has lost a total of 339.815.500 units.

The defender has won the battle !
The attacker has lost a total of 9.285.000 units.
The defender has lost a total of 143.825.500 units.

The defender has won the battle !
The attacker has lost a total of 9.285.000 units.
The defender has lost a total of 117.633.000 units.

All of the above listed attacks occurred through an ACS attack of 1-2 RIPS and a few espionage ships launched by LSD against a heavily defended planet. Please notice that in each case the defender, me, won each of the battles yet lost orders of magnitude more TD loss. This somehow makes no sense to me. Yet it is how the engine reports the results. As a result of this reporting loophole, it is not considered against the terms of the bashing policy for the attackers to launch as many attacks as they please against a single target time and time again.

The fact that the attackers 'lost' each battle makes this possible.

I would propose that the TD loss for each player be the determining factor in whether a player won or lost a battle for terms of the bashing policy. There are other strange factors that go along with the ACS report process in determining points on the attackers score board that also must be addressed.

I am open for a solid discussion on the matter. The events leading up to the conflict are immaterial to the discussion and will not be either addressed directly nor responded to by me.

DrLot

Simple fact: Gozar uses rips to irritate people and I use rips to irritate people. Are we any different? (well I guess my attacks are much more 'nooby ' and less impressive )
The change log clearly states how ACS attacks work btw.
Also leaving fleet on planets (even shells ) makes you a target. (And I made a pretty nice profit overall from yours )

I do agree that the attackers points does need to be addressed. By only adding 100 probes Dante was credited with doing 300mill damage for example.
Also these attacks come under the class of 'suicides ' and have been in use in ze for a loooong time. They follow the same tactics as suicide bombers

His point wasn't that he was mad about getting hit, it was that he feels it isn't right that since he technically won all the battles, it wasn't considered bashing.

I would also consider it bashing....Blade (b4 he fed Dennis his retirement fleet) did exactly the same to me the other day (I dared to probe lol)......Blade sent 10 attacks at the same time (is that not spam anyway?)....all with one RIP.....he knew full well that every battle would be lost but continued anyway......So that needs to change imo....and as DrLot mentioned, the fact that a few probes get thrown in should not mean that player gets a disproportionate TD on the Scoreboard....if that's the case then everyone will start to do the same.....making a complete mockery of the Scoreboard....and yes DireVenom, suicide RIPS are old hat nowadays...normally done by players with no interest left in the game....it is all they have left to offer their alliances generally

Well it certainly seems to be effective, it only seems to be Azguard who are unhappy about the whole thing. I just get smiley faces from other people when its mentioned. Since its been in the game so long, its clearly an accepted form of attack or the community wouldve mentioned it before.
Whining about it wont get you anywhere anyone who attacks me will soon see a screen full of red

Did the attacker, regardless of fleet disposition, regardless of results, attack the same target/world more than five times in a 24 hour period?

mightyoz wrote:Did the attacker, regardless of fleet disposition, regardless of results, attack the same target/world more than five times in a 24 hour period?

In my case it was 10 times...one planet...1 RIP...all sent to hit one after the other...apparently not bashing as I won every time despite my TD was far greater....and that is the issue (regardless of what I would call bashing)

UMMMM its not your case sprog.... unless your multi accounting again or just have bad grammar It was Dr Lots case.
Also, read the rules:

"Note: Attacking fleets that are completely destroyed and Interplanetary missile attacks do not count towards the bashing rule. Moon destruction missions do count towards the bashing rules."

Gozar does the same thing except he doesnt lose any rips any he causes amazing amounts of damage and wins every time. No rules broken and its a very old tactic so why moan now : ? Did you want some as well : ?

Nautilus<>Zero wrote:UMMMM its not your case sprog.... unless your multi accounting again or just have bad grammar It was Dr Lots case.
Also, read the rules:

"Note: Attacking fleets that are completely destroyed and Interplanetary missile attacks do not count towards the bashing rule. Moon destruction missions do count towards the bashing rules."

Gozar does the same thing except he doesnt lose any rips any he causes amazing amounts of damage and wins every time. No rules broken and its a very old tactic so why moan now : ? Did you want some as well : ?

If u want to accuse me of multi accounting I suggest you back it up with facts or report me to Zorg. The question above (from MightyOz) was relevant and I replied accordingly......Also, don't threaten me with the same just because you have given up with the game. You are just making things worse for your alliance ....

I think the general calculation of what constitutes a win etc is subjective. Perhaps the "Win" "Loss" thing should be abandoned? We have the points for scores, historically and weekly in our statistics. Surely if we have suffered 2 billion damage in 3 years, but have inflicted 10 billion in damage, anyone looking at those figures would realise that you have won more than you have lost. It's a war/strategy game, I'm sure real life generals sat in bunkers do not sit and look at league tables.