The work around the MS exchange is easy. The attack ban could simply be a reportable offense like Bashing, not an automatic enforcement. No complaint, no foul.

i think the above is agreeable. as long as the defender does not raise a flag, it is not an issue.

so you are happy how this is going? not an strict enforcement but a warning issued if tried to attack but u can still attack and be safe as long as the defender do not oppose?

have you not read the thread mate? i can see already few suggestions made proposed.

all it needs a title. why dont you find a suitable title and repost it?

SPY this is Desert_Reaper's post why have you taken it over..?

1st off SPY you are not my friend or mate or any permutation of kinship and never will be. So refrain from addressing me this way. I will refrain from speaking my mind over you and flaming this post of DR's any further. (I will respond to you soon don't worry). I would also like to point out there was no mention of an ex alliance attack ban only.. as this is easily worked round by also dropping out of your own alliance making your self eligible to attack. Having said this I can not see where ZE will be able to make a workable script for this issue let alone the time required to try.

In the mean time I feel Spacmanspliff's suggestion has a possibility of working.. but would need further discussion.. there is the chance you may have a spy in your alliance that request a MS or fleet destruction then shouts foul play... the idea is however workable.

Gozar wrote:SPY this is Desert_Reaper's post why have you taken it over..?

I believe if you can ask DR the question it will be better addressed. I didnt see him complaining why are you moderating this over him?

Gozar wrote:1st off SPY you are not my friend or mate or any permutation of kinship and never will be. So refrain from addressing me this way. I will refrain from speaking my mind over you and flaming this post of DR's any further.

I wasnt flaming really, or even trying to get in your good side. I think after so many months everyone in the forum knows where i stand in terms of being in pals with likes of you. Also dont make this about yourself please. You were quoted only as an example that is because you showed that the reason why we are arguing over is possible. No need to get ego hurt.

^^ the above response is not meant for flaming again. just to clear out intentions. about the thread as it turns out we both agreed on spiff's idea.

about it getting implemented or not that actually depends on the dev team. Our responsibility to point them to the right direction we are doing that here not assessing our dev teams capability. I think trying to guess that would be futile.

OMG SPY you could argue and flame the hind legs off a donkey.. what happened when you were at school did you get kicked off the debating team.. I do not believe I have ever meet anyone so argumentative, self absorbed and opinionated as you are. Just look at your post count 2683.. looks like the only thing you will ever be #1 at in this game is on forum posts. If you spent as much time playing the game as you do on here flaming other people then you would have done a lot better than you have..jmo


sorry DR I tried not to flame your post..
1 warning ~ please keep on topic ~ Cypher

Really Gozar? Come on, grow up. You don't have to take everything personally.

As to the matter at hand, (even though it's not my place to say) I actually don't like the idea DR. In my honest opinion, it all boils down to three things: dishonesty, greed, and anger. That's how this drama was caused.

The following spoiler is only an example and isn't necessary to be read. The phrase coined by top fleeters, "You have what I want...", is basically what I mean. Build a fleet that your leader wants, and they'll take it from you, well some of them. MOST players have the camaraderie that comes with an alliance, and this doesn't happen.

In the end, we're all in a civil war. Playerbase vs. playerbase, right vs. wrong. Everyone has their own point of view, and we need to respect that.

Took me some time to go thru all the topic, well I believe that the easiest solution for the dev team as well is :

1.If any given player is kicked from his Alliance he will be put in V mode if not online,
he will be able to come out of it at any time.

2.If someone leave the Alliance he still will be wearing a virtual tag of the Alliance and will not be able to attack any
of his old mates for at least 2 days. That will prevent the attacking player the advantage of checking online status, leaving the Alliance and attacking the "Old Good Friend".

I kindly request an answer from the dev team about all the topic, I am sure they can create a poll if they think the community
would be against the above.

happy hunting to all and have fun !

I disagree with the idea, the whole basis of joining and working together as an alliance is trust.
Trust cannot be forced upon the playerbase

It means that some care needs to be taken when choosing an alliance, because if you get it wrong then you may get crashed, defense bashed or farmed...so choose carefully

Oh... and remember to FS

Pkromm wrote: 1.If any given player is kicked from his Alliance he will be put in V mode if not online,
he will be able to come out of it at any time.

If I found an alliance mate's fleet down and he was not online...does this mean I can kick him to save his fleet being crashed