A plea to the multihunters
 

please stop turning this game into a gigantic farce by allowing ship farming on the scale that it is.

It really makes a massive mockery of the game when people who are blatantly cheat they should be dealt with more severely. None of this removing fleet thing from the planets, close them. They are cheating afterall. Simply removing fleet doesn't resolve the issue, as they will just go and farm again from different planets.

<Benneh> carDi who shall i suicide on?
<@carDi> :D
<@carDi> on someone
<ATRO> wish, everyone else is
<@carDi> who is not top1/2/3
<@carDi> and make him top1
<@carDi> like some1 who is in top10
<@carDi> and crash on him
<Benneh> hahahaha
<@carDi> to make him top1
<@carDi> ;D
<ATRO> o/
<ATRO> :P
<Benneh> i only hvave 600k co :P

(sorry this is over 10 lines of quote)

is something i saw earlier (taken from the Apprime public channel - i am not using this as a snipe at App, before somebody says that i am)...i think it pretty much sums up the attitude of players in the community wiith regards to it. This open, and frankly blase, attitude to it is making a mockery of both the game and the multihunters who are meant to police this.

Re: A plea to the multihunters
 

Like Benneh would ever crash.

Re: A plea to the multihunters
 

You can't close people without sufficient proof. Sorry, that's just the way it is.

Re: A plea to the multihunters
 

learn to handle a joke.

Re: A plea to the multihunters
 

what would you define as sufficient proof?

Re: A plea to the multihunters
 

also as a side note...how manytimes in the last 10 rounds has the winner not been subject to speculation about fleet/salvage donations, galaxy fund donations or general cheating allegations?

Re: A plea to the multihunters
 

Proof that leaves out the possibility of being framed.

Edit: Honestly instead of all this whining people should be thinking of ways the game could be changed to make the cheating that occurs have less impact/harder to do.

I haven't been that into it, but outside of this and elviz, it hasn't been too bad, has it? And I don't think galaxy fund was illegal. And now there's restrictions on it.

Re: A plea to the multihunters
 

i agree, sorry if that wasn't articulated somehow. I just feel that people cheating to win a game devalues what we have left of this game and ruins the gaming experience for those who don't cheat and it is even more annoying that cheating is simply 'what you do' to get ahead in this game.....it really shouldn't be like this at all

Re: A plea to the multihunters
 

But how can you say for sure the crashes that has happened this round have been arranged beforehand? And I mean absolutely 100%-I-would-stick-my-dick-in-that-dirty-hoe-because-i-know-she's-clean sure. Innocent until proven guilty and all that jazz.

Re: A plea to the multihunters
 

I saw a clear case when Pommeh shipfarmed Newt, was found guilty and only got his ships removed.

The proof was a newsie, where Newt was attacking and Pommeh defending. Newt even recalled, added more pods, while Pommeh recalled and resent likewise.

When I first saw the newsie it was already obvious it was cheating, it was me that noticed it was Newt who's ships were stolen, which made it even more obvious.

The only thing that happened was Pommeh getting the stolen ships removed.

Re: A plea to the multihunters
 

I'm sure that with "innocent until proven guilty" the test used is whether the judge/jury has any reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty, it doesn't have to be "100%-I-would-stick-my-dick-in-that-dirty-hoe-because-i-know-she's-clean sure"

Re: A plea to the multihunters
 

Stop whining, they are already removing ships of crashers where there is no clear breach of rules.

(which is I think a very dangerous path the MH's are on)

Re: A plea to the multihunters
 

Benneh didn't crash, so no rules were broken. What exactly is this topic about?

By the way, I'm crashing on Mek tomorrow. Better close us both.

Re: A plea to the multihunters
 

I don't think this is meant to be an accusation of Benneh or Apprime, more just a moan at the sad state of affairs and the attitude of the community.

Re: A plea to the multihunters
 

It is a major problem at the moment - there are some blatent cases out there of well-known friends crashing on one another e.g. Doddy on Reese (in which the ships werent even removed from Reese even though it was clearly intentional on Doddys part) The system used to work alot better - whether the rules have changed or the current MH's arent as strict is unclear - but it is evident it really isnt working. While it is often hard to close the planet that has farmed the ships as proof isnt easy to come by - the ships can be removed if the crashers attack is prooved intentional and the attacking planet can be closed. I'm not quite sure whats going on with the current 'lets remove some of the value gained but not the salvage' or somesuch shit - which really doesnt seem to work as they still get a large salvage bonus if nothing else.

In my opinion multi-round ban's would serve a function - alot of the reason people are willing to crash at this stage of the round is their planet has nothing left to play for and they want to ensure the success of their friends potentially winning themselves a favour or two in the future. Multi-round bans would stop this sort of farming - which appears to be the most common, while there maybe ways around this such as fake-nicking / IP changes etc it should still act to discourage as much farming.

Re: A plea to the multihunters
 

Mek, i like you think there has been some dubious crashes/landings in the last week but it can't be proved and they could just as well be genuine.

I choose to laugh about it as I can't see the point getting angry about something i have no control over.

The quicker i can put this round behind me the better :yawn:

Re: A plea to the multihunters
 

Although it is silly, I think it is potentially far more dangerous when the following rule is roughly applied


'(Intentional) crashes are fine, unless they are in the last week and affecting the top 10 planets'.

That is just plainly retarded.

Re: A plea to the multihunters
 

Actually, you cant close someone even with sufficient proof... as you need proof on every shipfarming planet as well for them to do anything.

Take elviz afew rounds ago, MH had enough proof to close him but didnt as they couldnt find enough proof on eksero to close eksero as well.. so left elviz open.


Should just turn salvage off for the last week when they turn off vacation mode.

Re: A plea to the multihunters
 

you mean 'you should just tell everyone to mass suicide on fleetcatches and/or attacks since it will never pay back anyway, stagnate the last week etc'


your idea has merit but should be something like, 'make salvage valueneutral the last week', you get max back what you lose, so 100% defender salvage if you kill enough of the attacker.

Re: A plea to the multihunters
 

I remember years ago that most people just suicided their fleet at the end of the round at #1. I did it this round and got closed :(

Not that I was bothered, I was outside top 400 on score.

Its seems you get banned for crashing your fleet now. However its also seems you can attack someone smaller than you and get the #1 guy to defend and hey presto donation without proof.

It means that anyone in the top #10 cant do anything for the last few weeks of the round for fear of being called cheaters.

Perhaps we need to have a limit on how far above your score you can attack, and also how far below your score you can defend. Or perhaps better still when we pick our targets to attack we ask the Multihunters if we can launch...

Re: A plea to the multihunters
 

Yeah, and if you want to go to your parents and log in there you better find out that ip first, notify the multihunters and then log in...

Re: A plea to the multihunters
 

In order to close the planet being donated to you should have proof that there's actually some intention on his part. It gets pretty hazy at times and is also fairly annoying. Say I'm #1 and you decide to suicide on me and pm me to say so. I say no thanks but you launch anyways. I go into the staggeringly inactive #multihunters channel and try to find someone to do something but what can they actually do anyways? Stop you from launching? And then you go, ****s sake, I wasn't going to land, I just pmed him that to make him think I was going to suicide to keep his fleet grounded. But what if you didn't actually mean that and you do suicide and end up grounding my fleet for 7/8/9 ticks only for me to get all the "donation" removed anyways? So you cheated, I did nothing wrong and yet my fleet had to remain at home for ~8 hours? Sounds fair.

Also pretty sure benneh was joking as he's in my gal and I don't think we'd bother. Unless it caused immense amounts of hassle and made people emo like this. Then we might.


Ignoring all rounds won by elviz (lolz etc) r26 there wasn't much controversy cheating wise, everyone just thought cronix was a selfish defwhore who used his alliance to get his #1. R27 was won by linkie who is only slightly more likely to be bothered cheating than a person who doesn't have an actual account. r28 voodoo won by miles just by virtue of not getting attacked. r29 there were escorts and some standard end of round suicides which made the difference between sunny and achi but neither ever accused the other of cheating and I didn't see or hear anything to suggest there was. R31 santa won by virtue of not getting attacked. r32 fairly similar for eksero and given that the top 4 planets were all his bp I doubt any of them cheated to beat the others. r33 I never saw anything to suggest reese cheated.

There's always a lot of controversy over zik planets and shit. However given that, up until this round, only 1 round has ever been won by a zik planet (for serious) it's not that common (although obviously etd pop up a bit as well).


PS In fairness theam I've logged in from a ****ing ton of random places, various friends, my girlfriend's, I'm pretty sure I've logged in while on holidays etc. I just don't login 5 minutes later from home :(

Re: A plea to the multihunters
 

That's ****ing awesome. Was that like an experiment to see what people could get away with or is someone actually that retarded and somehow got away with it?

Re: A plea to the multihunters
 

Come on JBG, it was obviously the latter.

Re: A plea to the multihunters
 

Holy shit, this is actually true (r13).

Re: A plea to the multihunters
 

Yeah thats a pretty lol fact right there, didnt realise :o

Re: A plea to the multihunters
 

buly forgot to mention that pommeh's def was pre-launched both times so i guess that answers your question

Re: A plea to the multihunters
 

So multihunters, what's your answer to this? Why wasn't Pommeh closed?

Re: A plea to the multihunters
 

Multihunters don't talk about cases. They don't even post on the forums to say they don't talk about cases, mainly because they rarely, if ever, read the forums (I think it's a pre-requisite for working for PA these days). They also won't talk about how utterly retarded this policy makes them look. But hey, on the bright side, here's a picture of a rabbit.

Re: A plea to the multihunters
 

I'd prefer to make salvage value neutral all round. It isnt there to make a profit from, its there to help people who have been bashed.

Re: A plea to the multihunters
 

Actually I have heard several people of PA team say it was to encourage defending.

Re: A plea to the multihunters
 

I would offer the suggestion that it is because attempting to seriously clean up cheating in the game is like pissing up a flagpole.

Re: A plea to the multihunters
 

The winners are usually from the top alliances and as those alliance HC's are the only ones the PA Team listen to.... why would they agree to fixing donations? :p

PA Team cant remember crap.

Re: A plea to the multihunters
 

I think that is an absolutely terrible attitude.
PA Team and the multihunters have to deal with a game engine that has evolved in such a way that there are fantastic opportunities for all kinds of cheating.

Impacting this, is the fact that any attempt to address that problem is likely to render the game unrecognizable from the form that the player base has grown to love (in so far as there are players that still love the game).

The fact that they even bother to take on the futile task of trying to keep people honest is something that they should be applauded for, not ridiculed.

Re: A plea to the multihunters
 

Are you implying that pateam listen to the HCs from Ascendancy/Apprime more than others? Because I'm lirling if so.

Talking about purposes is a waste of time really. I mean salvage was originally introduced in round 4 by a team who don't even play the game, never mind control it, any more.


Introducing a "salvage is value neutral" system to solely affect the top 10 planets is retarded though. Why don't we just automatically reset everyone to the same score every sunday morning and play out the round that way!

Re: A plea to the multihunters
 

But if defenders get back at least most (but not more) of what they lose then defending isnt a waste of resource and time.

But if you get something for nothing then it can and will be abused.

The game should be able to run pretty much on its own without the need for intervention.

Re: A plea to the multihunters
 

If there was zero salvage defence still would be worth it in certain scenarios. Pretty hilarious you're calling it abuse considering you decided to suicide your own fleet on the then #1 planet for no reason.

Re: A plea to the multihunters
 

I think the PA Team listens to Alliance HC's more than its community, why else would they set up a alliance HC channel to talk to them about changes?

I just dont think you should be able to profit from salvage.

Value neutral salvage.. So if a random suicided on the #1 planet.. then the #1 planet would lose 0 value.

Re: A plea to the multihunters
 

Right. But the #1 planets have only come from a fairly select group for a long time. In reality most of the hcs in there very rarely have winning planets in their alliance and don't really give a shit either way what affects them. Mostly they're after the retention of the status quo in order to insure that their shitty little positions of authority remain as they are for as long as possible.



Why? Even from one of those stupid realism perspectives it makes sense that you can (you kill all the enemy ships before they fire and use their random bits of ship floating around to build more ships).



Yeah, having my fleet grounded for 8 ticks just so some ****wad can suicide on me sounds like fantastic fun.

Re: A plea to the multihunters
 

If only you knew the full story, you'd prolly jizz your pants together with JBG. It was certainly fun though, no doubting that.

And its 'newt', not 'Newt' tyvm!

Re: A plea to the multihunters
 

err :confused:

Re: A plea to the multihunters
 

You're right, that is quite an unsummountable contradiction. You may call me Newt then. I am awaiting permission to divulge the full uncensored story of THE incident.

Re: A plea to the multihunters
 

Please do so newt, I'd love to hear it.

Re: A plea to the multihunters
 

Fixed. now "newt".

A general comment on salvage donations it is very problematic. Whilst donating fleets hirr-style has been frowned upon as unfair (it's the reason why JBG won Round 16 or whatever instead of Elviz, iirc), it's hard to police and harder to show that. As an example, for two people who are MORTAL ENEMIES, person A sends their fleet at person B who kills/steals it all, and they both get closed, and person A and their friends all circlejerk over getting a top planet.

Whatever else happens next round, Zik salvage will be nerfed. Salvage from attacking ships will also be nerfed.
We've tweaked and nerfed salvage repeatedly over the rounds to try and stop abuse whilst still giving defenders something to encourage them to lose ships whilst defending (i.e. making attacks less of a certain yes/no), and rewarding smaller planets more than big planets as (perhaps until the run fleet option was introduced) they were more likely to have their ships bashed repeatedly and still keep playing.

P.S. the multihunters went over the top planets near the end of the round to take away the obvious 'donations', and spent a while reverting several donations on 4 of the top 10 planets. Two of those planets actually voluntarily pointed out the fleets and lost ticks defending them, which shows they are honest and tbh respect to them.
Just because the MH don't brag about it though, doesn't mean they don't do anything.

Re: A plea to the multihunters
 

Thanks appoco, best christmas present ever!

I feel sorry for the mh, kinda. Take the pommeh example, more than likely he did cheat last round :rolleyes: - he isn't even high profile (though knows high profile people)... mh try to punish him and everyone goes crazy about it on irc. MH don't punish him and people complain at them. I'd assume that was the main reason why I was laughably closed cos of the incident (I have no friends, and a shit galaxy), whereas pom was left open. Though he was the one that allegedly farmed my fleet. Ace said the reason was because I admitted to trying to get pom closed on IRC, whilst using pa-chat and not logging into a pnick (and not giving any proof at all that the planet in question was really mine).

Cheating in pa is so easy (I put it to you that pom had been cheating all round, but had an emofit to try and get closed with our incident - before changing his mind to try and stay open), and mh will scarcely ever punish the top planets unless it is unbelievably staggeringly obvious - but will merilly punish lesser planets that won't cause an irc/forums stir.

So, pa should just change the rules to validate 'cheating'. Or MH should rule with an iron fist, instead of buckling to peer pressure (not possible in such a small playerbase though).

PS. I was denied permission to tell the full real story :(

Re: A plea to the multihunters
 

If you don't mind me asking... denied by whom?

Re: A plea to the multihunters
 

This makes me sad :(

Re: A plea to the multihunters
 

Ok Newt or newt :)

Part of what you post is correct but I dont agree to the part where you say that if its a top/big/known player we dont act the same as if it's a planet of a small/low ranked/unknown player.
I dont agree to that.
And you know i cant go in to details but if you want more info about why you got closed etc you know where to find me.
But tbh you know very well why you got closed.

As for the removal of the ships and not closing pommeh, no details on that but as you know there are 2 sides to every story and if you ask around the same thing happened to a few other players.

Re: A plea to the multihunters
 

This is in direct contradiction with what you said to me though. Where you told me that top 10 planets get treated differently because it 'affects the rankings so much'.
Also you implied that top 10 planets were more 'checked' and more readily 'disciplined' than you would with a planet ranked 600th.

Re: A plea to the multihunters
 

the "affects the ranking so much" part means in the last few weeks we go over the top planets (not just top 10) more in regards to donations/crashers etc.
I didnt say we "discipline" the top 10 planets more then say a ranked 600 planet.