let's not openly discuss moderation action, please. Edited in a better reference for you.-DR. Because I am no longer able to post in my original thread on the 1 second lanx hit.. I request this issue be offered to a vote..

1st Game play should be equal for all players.. Thus any flaw bug or discovered game issue should be made public to all players by admin. more so if they are aware of any such issue before the general players.
What I would also ask is why if ZE/admin decides an issue is bug use or exploitation and a player is band.
In my opinion this is exploration of a flaw in our game, as such until this has been resolved and decided by either ZE or the players be treated thus way till then. ( this was my thought when I posted regards to Raven.. as such I retract any statement that refers to him cheating)

2nd This issue in my opinion is contrary to the original game play.. The purpose of building a phalanx and developing its levels is to be able to discover fleets and match there return time with skill and precision. With the current factors allowable in the game at the moment ZE is removing the use of a phalanx and if you think about it the use of moons.. because why need a moon if you can avoid a phalanx.. it does not matter is someone can see your fleet return if you can FS and avoid it being hit even if timed to a 1 second hit.. thus the hole game is changed.

In reality the purchase of Rubies will be almost removed for general game play. I know some players would like this to stay as it is.. If this is I am almost certain there will be any fewer and fewer fleet crashes and the game will loose its appeal. let alone it main revenue.

I ask ZE to allow a vote.. but when doing so do not think well you will keep your fleet easier.. because so will every other player.. You to will not be able to use phalanx.. moons and the structure of this game will change.
With the drop of revenue I do not know how the game will continue al all.

I can't fault Gozar's logic. Secrets in a game or sport are a dangerous thing to have. It creates an uneven player field with a class of elite players. Those who know the secret to one second escapes can save a great deal of effort and save them selves to a huge aspect of the game.

Would it be fair if there was a certain spot on the football field where you could get an automatic first down, but only certain players knew it. The only way to make this fair is if everyone knows. It should be posted on the forum and let the chips fall where they may.

Agreed! If Zorg knows of 6 ways ( really six!!!!!) then feel free to post and help everyone playing here......if not then sort something so that a 1 second lanx is not avoidable (other than by a ninja obviously)

thats the thing, 1 second fleetsave, it can be beaten, i dont think a same second fleetsave exists.

As I have proven, according to Zorg's order of strict priority viewtopic.php?f=17&t=7055, I should not have missed the DF, but I did, and I defy anyone here that can time a same second hit every time.

So I vote for revealing the six ways, if not, then do away with the phalanx and let us grow fat and happy.

If one uses the method that I used, there are still no guarantees. Yet, yes, the chance exists - and why wouldn't it? Why shouldn't it? I will tell you, my one escape was way too close for comfort, and the close call resulted in my changing my fleetsaving dramatically -- because there are no guarantees that I can always key what needs to be keyed in the limited time available. I've evaded a one second hit, but other one second hits DID hit me. Timing a same second strike, from which NO escape is possible, is surely no more difficult than timing a one second strike - and I hardly believe a one second strike is ALWAYS evadable ALL the time. What Zorg noted is that it was not IMPOSSIBLE and that the CHANCE exists.

Let's clear out some things, first of all:

-This is a browser game.
-The 1 second difference evasion is possible through both a simple way or utilization of browser capabilities.
-Split Second feature works fine. If you find out that it does not, open a bug thread and follow the procedure.
-We do want the best for all and primarily for the game. Players come and go and what is left is always the game.
-This is a real time strategy game.

Let's clear out one more thing:

-Setting a ninja mission takes time and it is difficult. Why ? Because current controls are not helpful towards it.

Since setting a ninja mission has became SO IMPORTANT for you, I have a simple solution.

Solution:
-We make fleet timing a 1-click issue upgrading the old controls of 10/20/30/40/50/60/70/80/90/100%
We will actually keep them but also add an extra field that will read: EXACT TIME. Then our smart engine will calculate the % needed and will send the fleet.

Prons:
-Any scripting used to set attacks will become obsolete.
-Any scripting used to set defends will become osbolete.
-Any fustration to set an attack will become obsolete.
-Any fustration coming from possible scripting will become obsolete.
-Any fustration that someone else except yourself is to be blamed for the attack, will become obsolete, which will mean less ranting on the forums.
-Ninja becomes a feature for all and not for those that can use tabs and lose their sleep.
-The upgraded control will help in various other aspects of the game and not just ninja. It is in fact an improved version of an older suggestion.


Cons:
-I see none. Even the argument that "skilled" players will lose a weapon does not stand because it is the same argument that brought this issue here.


If you agree, we can move on and have it.

Zorg, I’m just looking for a clarification on some of your statements.

First, when you say ninja are you talking about the act of landing an attack on an opponent with such timing that they cannot escape a flight of their own that has just landed? I’ve only heard ninja used to describe an orchestrated defensive win, and the above referred to as a phalanx or an intercept.

Second. If nothing changed now, are you happy with the existence of the one second escape?

Last, Is you suggestion a solution in that it would allow an attacker to time his attack down to less than a second more easily?

Flapper wrote:Zorg, I’m just looking for a clarification on some of your statements.

First, when you say ninja are you talking about the act of landing an attack on an opponent with such timing that they cannot escape a flight of their own that has just landed? I’ve only heard ninja used to describe an orchestrated defensive win, and the above referred to as a phalanx or an intercept.

Second. If nothing changed now, are you happy with the existence of the one second escape?

Last, Is you suggestion a solution in that it would allow an attacker to time his attack down to less than a second more easily?

1)
I am (probably wrongly) using ninja term to describe any case that times an attack exactly on the return time of a fleet.

2)
It is important to understand that it is a false starting point. This is not the real issue. I find it normal and I can perhaps find even more than 6 ways to do this and all undetectable. So why don't you use Split Second from first place ?

3)
My solution is simple: we just add an extra box where you will enter the desired engage time (for all missions). This will allow the attacker to utilize the split second feature easier.

On second thought, this simplified timing would make it easier to catch fleets, making it more difficult for weaker players.

I agree that this is a false starter, but it was the flash point. There are a lot of interconnected issues that need to be discussed. On the other hand, if nothing changed I think we'd all live. lol. I love Zorg and any complicated system will have flaws and even if it didn't we'd still complain.