Howdy doody!!

I raised this issue before......still no word from Zorg as to why they even raised player protection to 200k in Extreme....sure don't recall all the player base continually asking for it to be raised. Seems an elite few who buy copious amounts of rubies are abusing this new limit ( but not just ruby buyers before anyone grizzles..)...Zorg only has to check (for example) Greeks last few hits this past week to see he hits new players....then new players quit...congrats Greek....you sure know how to keep noobs interest in the game a very short lived experience......now others are starting to super noob it...(Super noob term used losely, not hard to hit a 50k player when u got over 5 million fleet points that were mostly built using rubies) .....then Greek vmodes till he gets more rubies to build yet more fleet so he can crash yet more new players.....BRAVO .....still as long as Zorg allow this "loophole" then it will continue...or it could easily listen to the player base and some of their ideas as already suggested previously. Like a 3-6 month time limit on player protection .....

mightyoz wrote:
As it stands, we have players, great fleets in their possession, fleets that are still growing, and they are newbs still? Hardly fair now, is it?

Yes. It is fair.

How so? A player gets "New Player Protection" when they are not "New Players".

Because you are complaining about a player that is playing the game in his own style, which you object to. It does not make it unfair to anybody (except you)..

What player am I complaining about? I do not remember complaining about any particular player. I am talking about a subject. You say "his style"? Who is this male person that you imagine I am talking about?

So. Going back to the subject at hand. The increasing numbers of players that seem to be using this tactic. A tactic using a loophole in the game rules and set up. A concept that was not imagined by the game designers when they tried to implement a level of fairness in to the game. That being to give " New Players" a level of protection. Not a level of protection to experienced players who have found a way to exploit this "fair start" given to New Players.

And here we go again with accusations of cheating... Where do you get off saying players are cheating when they are playing within the rules. You should not say players are "Exploiting" the rules when the rules do not specifically state you cannot have a fleet while under a certain level - this being the noob protection level. It is not a loophole. It is poor design when the protection was implemented.

Sure there are tons of suggestions to fix this so called "issue". But there needs to be "action" instead of "talk" about this "Problem".

Marius, you really most learn to control your emotions, they will be your undoing.

You have not answered my questions as to whom you think I am referring, you have not made much sense at all. Where do I get off suggesting others are cheating?? lol.

Also, who am I now supposedly accusing of cheating? You must really read everything properly is you are to understand everything that's being said.

It is a pure and simple loophole. Players using a flaw in the system to remain within NEW PLAYER PROTECTION is not was was envisaged when the NEW PLAYER PROTECTION was put in to place.

You have stated, "But there needs to be "action" instead of "talk" about this "Problem"." Lol. How does this happen if we don't put this as a topic in the game suggestions? Are you going to change it, if so, please expand on this. It would be interesting to know how you would go about it.

mightyoz wrote:Marius, you really most learn to control your emotions, they will be your undoing..

Are you kidding me?

You suggest a solution to a "Problem" that you think is "Exploiting" shoddy code. And you think I am taking it personally? I am sure others think that the way you state "they" are breaking/bending the rules is getting old.

There have been numerous suggestions that have been sent to Zorg for implementation.. None have been..

Oh, and just because you ask me a question, does not demand a response from me. Sorry but you don't deserve answers on demand..

Marius wrote:

mightyoz wrote:Marius, you really most learn to control your emotions, they will be your undoing..

Are you kidding me?

You suggest a solution to a "Problem" that you think is "Exploiting" shoddy code. And you think I am taking it personally? I am sure others think that the way you state "they" are breaking/bending the rules is getting old.

There have been numerous suggestions that have been sent to Zorg for implementation.. None have been..

Oh, and just because you ask me a question, does demand a response from me. Sorry but you don't deserve answers on demand..

I have suggested a solution to a perceived problem, yes, I have. This is the game suggestions topics. This is where suggestions are made. Again, hence that name, game suggestions!!

Suggestions are made in the suggestions topics, funny I know, but not too difficult to understand.

If you accuse me of suggesting that I am referring to a particular player, it would be handy to know whom you are referring. Otherwise it's pointless.

You said "Oh, and just because you ask me a question, does demand a response from me. Sorry but you don't deserve answers on demand.. "

Okay, I ask you a question, as you said. "does demand a response from me. Sorry but you don't deserve answers on demand.. "

So, does it demand a response or not, it's a little contradictory. It either does or it doesn't. Which?




Also, I am editing this now as you seem to have edited your own post so that i now makes a modicum of sense. "Oh, and just because you ask me a question, does not demand a response from me. Sorry but you don't deserve answers on demand..

Last edited by Marius on Fri Apr 22, 2016 10:14 pm, edited 1 time in total. "



You still haven't answered though, who you accuse me of cheating? But as we know, you will not answer this, because you don't know yourself. I will reiterate, please read everything PROPERLY, you may understand what's being said? Perhaps not, lol.