User Name
Password

Go Back   Planetarion Forums > Planetarion Related Forums > Planetarion Suggestions

Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes
Unread 24 Dec 2009, 21:31   #51
Knight Theamion
Miles Teg
 
Knight Theamion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Dom City
Posts: 5,192
Knight Theamion is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himKnight Theamion is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himKnight Theamion is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himKnight Theamion is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himKnight Theamion is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himKnight Theamion is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himKnight Theamion is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himKnight Theamion is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himKnight Theamion is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himKnight Theamion is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himKnight Theamion is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like him
Re: A plea to the multihunters

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ace View Post
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.
It's a sketchy area you are in then as a multihunter. What you say is that if you want to cheat, you better do it in the earlier stages, get value steals there and so forth then in the later weeks.
Also 'top planets'. It can be the different of winning or losing as a tag or galaxy if you get people to suicide on the small planets that barely count for tag etc.
It's just so subjective you shouldn't do it, or should do it properly Ace.
__________________
Audentes Fortuna Iuvat
Knight Theamion is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 25 Dec 2009, 00:25   #52
Paisley
The brother of Spammer
 
Paisley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Paisley - Scotland
Posts: 2,352
Paisley is a glorious beacon of lightPaisley is a glorious beacon of lightPaisley is a glorious beacon of lightPaisley is a glorious beacon of lightPaisley is a glorious beacon of lightPaisley is a glorious beacon of light
Re: A plea to the multihunters

One thing that is said alot on IRC/Forums is MHs inconsistencies in dealing with cheats. This does raise some questions.

Do Multihunters follow a set procedure or do they say Right whats the next case....Blah blah farming blah blah X Pnick is a high roler this could cause some shit blah blah... lose 1 mill value, keep planet open ....NEXT?

Is the Workload for the Multihunters too much? (Is this where judge starts cursing Cardi/making Lith remarks again?) Where Corners are being cut due to constraints.
Is there anything that can be done to make Multihunting easier for the team like.....

*Hardcoding out out of tag defense.
*Introduction of Penalising Alliance(s) Via a score deduction on top of the planet deletion. As some means of being a deterent

I do realise that being a Multihunter is a thankless Job. (Thanks for doing it.) However The team Doesn't really insire confidence.
Paisley is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 25 Dec 2009, 01:11   #53
Knight Theamion
Miles Teg
 
Knight Theamion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Dom City
Posts: 5,192
Knight Theamion is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himKnight Theamion is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himKnight Theamion is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himKnight Theamion is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himKnight Theamion is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himKnight Theamion is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himKnight Theamion is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himKnight Theamion is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himKnight Theamion is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himKnight Theamion is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himKnight Theamion is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like him
Re: A plea to the multihunters

They aren't really following a strict set of rules.
For instance in my case i had someone suiciding on me and with tick 1 and tick 3 (it was a 3 tick suicide, pinning my fleet down for 11 ticks :S) I almost had a 1 mill valuesteal. With tick 2 his FR crashing on me which was after salvage (it was ugly) barely a profit.

Because I immediately spend my salvage, what was removed from the crash was the valuesteal of tick 1 and 3 and not tick 2. Also the already spend salvage was never removed because it couldn't be 'traced back' and I said that I refused to 'save it up' (i could have saved up the ammount of resources in the remaining ticks).

So to answer your question Paisley: No, they do not always act on a straight set of rules and just 'try to do whats best'. If they managed to remove the crash properly (still, why it should have been removed is beyond me. Someone, outside of my knowledge, decides to suicide on me. I cover the waves ingal with signs (who ended 4th) so that if he sends full he gets fully frozen. I get a value steal on tick 1, ugly kill pure salvage on tick 2, and another valuesteal on tick 3 as i had an AU and guessed he send all fleet at me so I could maximize tick 3) I would probably have ended 9th instead of 8th, but alas.
__________________
Audentes Fortuna Iuvat
Knight Theamion is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 25 Dec 2009, 03:13   #54
newt
Banned
 
newt's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Blackburn
Posts: 897
newt has much to be proud ofnewt has much to be proud ofnewt has much to be proud ofnewt has much to be proud ofnewt has much to be proud ofnewt has much to be proud ofnewt has much to be proud ofnewt has much to be proud of
Re: A plea to the multihunters

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ace View Post
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.
don't get me wrong mqan, I know I put up a convincing performance in #mh to keep pommeh open, but some facts:

1. I hardly ever logged into my account - pommeh was playing it by vnc all round long
2. pommeh was also playing the account ""i attacked"" by vnc too, an account i set up for him.
3. you closed me roflingly, especially considering you had 0 proof the "alan" on irc owned the actual account... you based the closure 100% on "alan" saying he tried to get pommeh closed.......

to summarise:

you would have closed us both (justifiably) had pommeh been in an avg gal with an avg rank. But no, he was in a high profile galaxy. Thus he stays open to end top20, but you close one of his two multi accounts.

edit:

actually, at the time, I asked you over and over again, politely withou being rude or anything, why I was closed. Your response was: "you admitted to me that you tried to get pommeh closed" (by attacking a random planet on 200 roids outside the top1500 and somehow forcing pommeh to defend vs me). At no point did you ever get any proof at all whatsoever that I owned the account. Nor did it occur to you that I might have been lyin my ass off on irc to try and keep pommeh open after his ****ing lol-self-farm effort.

Last edited by newt; 25 Dec 2009 at 03:18.
newt is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 25 Dec 2009, 12:22   #55
Ronin
Legionaire
 
Ronin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: nld
Posts: 50
Ronin will become famous soon enoughRonin will become famous soon enough
Re: A plea to the multihunters

Quote:
Originally Posted by Linkie View Post
You can't close people without sufficient proof. Sorry, that's just the way it is.
I remember, a couple of rounds back. Some guy Linkie won a round. But I'm pretty sure he wasnt ever online. He couldnt have been the one to find his targets every night! Cheat!

On topic:
You can't just close people down over some IRC conversation. And I have a feeling MultiHunters actually try to track these things down. But it's very hard to prove.
__________________
Legion
and: NoS/FanG/Jenova/CT/DLR

Round 3 - 8 (Legion)
Round 9 - 10.5 (Nos/FanG)
Round 22 - 23 (Jenova)
Round 24 - 28 (CT HC)
Round 31 (DLR)
Ronin is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 25 Dec 2009, 14:08   #56
Buly
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 386
Buly is a jewel in the roughBuly is a jewel in the roughBuly is a jewel in the roughBuly is a jewel in the rough
Re: A plea to the multihunters

Apparently they don't close when it's obvious though, so what's the point in even having them? This Pommeh example proves how weak they are to players opinions on the closure.
__________________
Adapt has never been an official ND HC. He was on his way to promotion for some reason, but then got denied promotion. Lol at the muppet claiming he has been
Buly is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 25 Dec 2009, 23:04   #57
Paisley
The brother of Spammer
 
Paisley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Paisley - Scotland
Posts: 2,352
Paisley is a glorious beacon of lightPaisley is a glorious beacon of lightPaisley is a glorious beacon of lightPaisley is a glorious beacon of lightPaisley is a glorious beacon of lightPaisley is a glorious beacon of light
Re: A plea to the multihunters

Quote:
Originally Posted by Buly View Post
Apparently they don't close when it's obvious though, so what's the point in even having them? This Pommeh example proves how weak they are to players opinions on the closure.
The senario that newt has given certainly supports thats

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes - it might be time / time coming where MHs might have to be audited. I dont think inhouse approach seems to be working effectively.
Paisley is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 25 Dec 2009, 23:14   #58
Assassin
PA Ancient
 
Assassin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Ventnor, Isle Of Wight
Posts: 1,060
Assassin has a brilliant futureAssassin has a brilliant futureAssassin has a brilliant futureAssassin has a brilliant futureAssassin has a brilliant futureAssassin has a brilliant futureAssassin has a brilliant futureAssassin has a brilliant futureAssassin has a brilliant futureAssassin has a brilliant futureAssassin has a brilliant future
Re: A plea to the multihunters

To be honest its a difficult subject here. I was a MH for a few rounds, some of which i was of course the head MH (at one point was only myself and Squishy actually hunting which i guess did help in a way to be more consistant) however... i was also nicknamed the Hitler of PA due too i was said to be too strict. (ie i brought in the support planet rule during a round when a certain alliance was first, and was said to be biased against that alliance)

Hence my point if you do actually punish top players (which i had no problem with doing at all) you get bitched at.... for stupid reasons such as 'oh your biased against them and for another alliance/player' or other stupid reasons.


However, i also agree as i have mentioned in several threads already for the past 2-3 rounds the current MH situation is terrible with no consistancy... ie theres no procedures anymore for been closed/warned. Now its whateva the MH dealing with you sees fit bassically... Btw though on a side note when i was in charge people said i was at the time anti exi and for 1up.. so as a laugh to take the piss i joined 1up after i left PA team.. however Ace is a former CT HC and remy left MH to HC ct... how come no one gives them stick? :/
__________________
Played: Round 1-13. PA Team: Round 13-17. The Return: Round 18-19. PA Team: Round 20. Return.. Again: Round 21-37 Retired: Round 38 Returned: Round 39-45 Retired: Round 45 Returned: Round: 56

Ever been attacked by a p3nguin? You get left a bit black and white!

p3nguin Founder
Assassin is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 26 Dec 2009, 01:59   #59
Buly
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 386
Buly is a jewel in the roughBuly is a jewel in the roughBuly is a jewel in the roughBuly is a jewel in the rough
Re: A plea to the multihunters

Anyone in charge of anything always gets called Hitler or something like that sooner or later Assassin, that's just the way it works.

It's worse that they're to cowardly to close anyone than that they don't see too that rules are followed.

I feel like it's very tempting to cheat as a zik seeing how easy it is and how easily you get away with it.
__________________
Adapt has never been an official ND HC. He was on his way to promotion for some reason, but then got denied promotion. Lol at the muppet claiming he has been
Buly is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 26 Dec 2009, 02:37   #60
Paisley
The brother of Spammer
 
Paisley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Paisley - Scotland
Posts: 2,352
Paisley is a glorious beacon of lightPaisley is a glorious beacon of lightPaisley is a glorious beacon of lightPaisley is a glorious beacon of lightPaisley is a glorious beacon of lightPaisley is a glorious beacon of light
Re: A plea to the multihunters

At least you stuck to your guns assassin
Paisley is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 26 Dec 2009, 10:48   #61
Tietäjä
Good Son
 
Tietäjä's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Finland
Posts: 3,991
Tietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better place
Re: A plea to the multihunters

Quote:
Originally Posted by Assassin View Post
(ie i brought in the support planet rule during a round when a certain alliance was first, and was said to be biased against that alliance)

Hence my point if you do actually punish top players (which i had no problem with doing at all) you get bitched at.... for stupid reasons such as 'oh your biased against them and for another alliance/player' or other stupid reasons.
You brought in the support rule during a round of eXilition dominance - and subsequently stopped enforcing it during a round of 1up dominance, by words of mazzelaar, actually granting them a permission to use support planets. In no fashion was the support planet rule too strict: it was simply enforced for a selected group of people and turned a blind eye on for another group.

People can be surprisingly aware of who gets closed and why others aren't - spotting inconsistency isn't that hard. You'll get nailed for it really fast if you start pulling off stunts. The whole problem of the system might invoke from the fact that of recently all the hunters have been heavily community involved: you're now calling the joining 1up a "joke", and nobody's going to pull anything else off you, but it was no wonder you did so. Your affiliation to them was undeniable and noticeable from your rules enforcement. Similar things probably apply to Ace and Remy if you look close enough. It's not very easy to shake off burden of strong affiliations from rules enforcing, and this is why it's relatively bad to nominate heavily alliance community involved figures to the job.

Quote:
Btw though on a side note when i was in charge people said i was at the time anti exi and for 1up.. so as a laugh to take the piss i joined 1up after i left PA team.. however Ace is a former CT HC and remy left MH to HC ct... how come no one gives them stick? :/
People do give them the stick for this, people have been giving the stick about this for ages. During your career - the time of which I was active - nothing was any more consistent than after.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Buly
It's worse that they're to cowardly to close anyone than that they don't see too that rules are followed.
It's not about cowardice on times - sometimes it's about affiliation, friendship, mutual respect, and promises made to both sides - eg. "be nice, you get to join our alliance next round".
Tietäjä is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 26 Dec 2009, 11:06   #62
Assassin
PA Ancient
 
Assassin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Ventnor, Isle Of Wight
Posts: 1,060
Assassin has a brilliant futureAssassin has a brilliant futureAssassin has a brilliant futureAssassin has a brilliant futureAssassin has a brilliant futureAssassin has a brilliant futureAssassin has a brilliant futureAssassin has a brilliant futureAssassin has a brilliant futureAssassin has a brilliant futureAssassin has a brilliant future
Re: A plea to the multihunters

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tietäjä View Post
You brought in the support rule during a round of eXilition dominance - and subsequently stopped enforcing it during a round of 1up dominance, by words of mazzelaar, actually granting them a permission to use support planets. In no fashion was the support planet rule too strict: it was simply enforced for a selected group of people and turned a blind eye on for another group.

People can be surprisingly aware of who gets closed and why others aren't - spotting inconsistency isn't that hard. You'll get nailed for it really fast if you start pulling off stunts. The whole problem of the system might invoke from the fact that of recently all the hunters have been heavily community involved: you're now calling the joining 1up a "joke", and nobody's going to pull anything else off you, but it was no wonder you did so. Your affiliation to them was undeniable and noticeable from your rules enforcement. Similar things probably apply to Ace and Remy if you look close enough. It's not very easy to shake off burden of strong affiliations from rules enforcing, and this is why it's relatively bad to nominate heavily alliance community involved figures to the job.



People do give them the stick for this, people have been giving the stick about this for ages. During your career - the time of which I was active - nothing was any more consistent than after.



It's not about cowardice on times - sometimes it's about affiliation, friendship, mutual respect, and promises made to both sides - eg. "be nice, you get to join our alliance next round".
I was wondering when my biggest fan would appear i was going to actually mention 'when is kj going to appear after this post?' suprised you managed to wait more then 24 hours tbh... but anyway hi
__________________
Played: Round 1-13. PA Team: Round 13-17. The Return: Round 18-19. PA Team: Round 20. Return.. Again: Round 21-37 Retired: Round 38 Returned: Round 39-45 Retired: Round 45 Returned: Round: 56

Ever been attacked by a p3nguin? You get left a bit black and white!

p3nguin Founder
Assassin is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 26 Dec 2009, 14:46   #63
Tietäjä
Good Son
 
Tietäjä's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Finland
Posts: 3,991
Tietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better place
Re: A plea to the multihunters

Quote:
Originally Posted by Assassin View Post
I was wondering when my biggest fan would appear i was going to actually mention 'when is kj going to appear after this post?' suprised you managed to wait more then 24 hours tbh... but anyway hi
Seriously, you should at least try reply something tangible and useful instead of this. One day someone's gonna stab you.
Tietäjä is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 26 Dec 2009, 18:51   #64
ellonweb
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 401
ellonweb has a brilliant futureellonweb has a brilliant futureellonweb has a brilliant futureellonweb has a brilliant futureellonweb has a brilliant futureellonweb has a brilliant futureellonweb has a brilliant futureellonweb has a brilliant futureellonweb has a brilliant futureellonweb has a brilliant futureellonweb has a brilliant future
Re: A plea to the multihunters

It really isn't that hard to multihunt properly, why everyone in PA fails at it so horrifically I don't know.
ellonweb is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 26 Dec 2009, 22:00   #65
Appocomaster
PA Team
 
Appocomaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,449
Appocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus would
Re: A plea to the multihunters

Quote:
Originally Posted by ellonweb View Post
It really isn't that hard to multihunt properly, why everyone in PA fails at it so horrifically I don't know.
That's quite a statement to make. Could you clarify why you feel that? Have you multihunted in games similar to Planetarion before?
__________________
r8-10 RaH r10.5-12 MISTU
Appocomaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 26 Dec 2009, 23:09   #66
ellonweb
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 401
ellonweb has a brilliant futureellonweb has a brilliant futureellonweb has a brilliant futureellonweb has a brilliant futureellonweb has a brilliant futureellonweb has a brilliant futureellonweb has a brilliant futureellonweb has a brilliant futureellonweb has a brilliant futureellonweb has a brilliant futureellonweb has a brilliant future
Re: A plea to the multihunters

I multihunted in Planet-ia (wow, seriously? what a lame word filter) for two years or so, having had clear allegiances to certain groups beforehand, I had no problem staying neutral with my hunting. I made "big case" closures without any question of bias that I'm aware of. I used my head and applied the rules sensibly and consistently without the need for the line being drawn and proscribed to the finest details (this is retarded and just plain awful), I didn't randomly choose which rules to enforce in different rounds and the players knew what was right and what was wrong as a result.

A lot of people disliked me and my decisions (that comes with the job), but they didn't think I was biased, they didn't think I was an idiot, and more importantly, they knew what I thought and I knew how they felt, I didn't refrain from engaging the community. Rules and policy need to adapt in order to serve the people you're trying to protect. It is very easy to lose touch with the playerbase while in this kind of role.

Even if some of the other ex ******** people disagree with my evaluation of myself (obviously I'm not perfect and it's very easy to tell only one side of the story), I should stress two points again:
  • I used my head and applied the rules sensibly and consistently without the need for the line being drawn and proscribed to the finest details, I didn't randomly choose which rules to enforce in different rounds.
  • I didn't refrain from engaging the community. Rules and policy need to adapt in order to serve the people you're trying to protect.
ellonweb is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 28 Dec 2009, 12:08   #67
Willzzz
Legion Idle Master
 
Willzzz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 425
Willzzz has much to be proud ofWillzzz has much to be proud ofWillzzz has much to be proud ofWillzzz has much to be proud ofWillzzz has much to be proud ofWillzzz has much to be proud ofWillzzz has much to be proud ofWillzzz has much to be proud ofWillzzz has much to be proud ofWillzzz has much to be proud of
Re: A plea to the multihunters

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tietäjä View Post
Seriously, you should at least try reply something tangible and useful instead of this. One day someone's gonna stab you.
And of course that was really clever mentioning to assman regarding him been stabbed wasnt it you little troll? Take your own advice as i also recall you keep going on about assman been biased in every post maybe you need to get yourself a new hobby?
__________________

Played: Round 1-13. PA Team: Round 13-17. The Return: Round 18-19. PA Team: Round 20. Return.. Again: Round 21-37 Retired: Round 38 Returned: Round 39-45 Retired: Round 45 Returned: Round: 56

p3nguin Founder
Willzzz is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 28 Dec 2009, 12:10   #68
Willzzz
Legion Idle Master
 
Willzzz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 425
Willzzz has much to be proud ofWillzzz has much to be proud ofWillzzz has much to be proud ofWillzzz has much to be proud ofWillzzz has much to be proud ofWillzzz has much to be proud ofWillzzz has much to be proud ofWillzzz has much to be proud ofWillzzz has much to be proud ofWillzzz has much to be proud of
Re: A plea to the multihunters

Quote:
Originally Posted by ellonweb View Post
I multihunted in Planet-ia (wow, seriously? what a lame word filter) for two years or so, having had clear allegiances to certain groups beforehand, I had no problem staying neutral with my hunting. I made "big case" closures without any question of bias that I'm aware of. I used my head and applied the rules sensibly and consistently without the need for the line being drawn and proscribed to the finest details (this is retarded and just plain awful), I didn't randomly choose which rules to enforce in different rounds and the players knew what was right and what was wrong as a result.

A lot of people disliked me and my decisions (that comes with the job), but they didn't think I was biased, they didn't think I was an idiot, and more importantly, they knew what I thought and I knew how they felt, I didn't refrain from engaging the community. Rules and policy need to adapt in order to serve the people you're trying to protect. It is very easy to lose touch with the playerbase while in this kind of role.

Even if some of the other ex ******** people disagree with my evaluation of myself (obviously I'm not perfect and it's very easy to tell only one side of the story), I should stress two points again:
  • I used my head and applied the rules sensibly and consistently without the need for the line being drawn and proscribed to the finest details, I didn't randomly choose which rules to enforce in different rounds.
  • I didn't refrain from engaging the community. Rules and policy need to adapt in order to serve the people you're trying to protect.

Wasnt this the same game by the way which made killmark (i do love him but still we all know his history) perhaps one of the biggest known cheats in pa's history, the head mh of this game your reffering too?
__________________

Played: Round 1-13. PA Team: Round 13-17. The Return: Round 18-19. PA Team: Round 20. Return.. Again: Round 21-37 Retired: Round 38 Returned: Round 39-45 Retired: Round 45 Returned: Round: 56

p3nguin Founder
Willzzz is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 28 Dec 2009, 12:15   #69
Mzyxptlk
mz.
Alien Invasion Champion, Submarine Champion, Tiger Punch Champion, Barts Watersports Adventure Champion
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 8,587
Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: A plea to the multihunters

Quote:
Originally Posted by Willzzz View Post
Wasnt this the same game by the way which made killmark (i do love him but still we all know his history) perhaps one of the biggest known cheats in pa's history, the head mh of this game your reffering too?
ellonweb != Ollie
__________________
The outraged poets threw sticks and rocks over the side of the bridge. They were all missing Mary and he felt a contented smug feeling wash over him. He would have given them a coy little wave if the roof hadn't collapsed just then. Mary then found himself in the middle of an understandably shocked family's kitchen table. So he gave them the coy little wave and realized it probably would have been more effective if he hadn't been lying on their turkey.
Mzyxptlk is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 28 Dec 2009, 12:47   #70
Veedeejem!
Hibernating
 
Veedeejem!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Team Kesha
Posts: 1,621
Veedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond repute
Re: A plea to the multihunters

In the 20+ or so rounds I played planetarion I noticed alot of inconsistancies.
People get threated if they're high profile or not, high profile galaxy or not and ofc if the mh's like your alliance or not.

Some people or groups get away with ALOT more than others, that's just the way it is.

Life's not fair, deal with it
__________________
[InSomnia]
Official designated driver

[ToF] - [eXilition] - [Rock] - [Denial] - [DLR] - [eVolution] - [ODDR] - [HR] - [Ultores] - [Apprime] - [Ironborn]
Veedeejem! is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 30 Dec 2009, 01:41   #71
Tietäjä
Good Son
 
Tietäjä's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Finland
Posts: 3,991
Tietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better place
Re: A plea to the multihunters

Quote:
Originally Posted by Willzzz View Post
And of course that was really clever mentioning to assman regarding him been stabbed wasnt it you little troll? Take your own advice as i also recall you keep going on about assman been biased in every post maybe you need to get yourself a new hobby?
Ah of course, the fanboy. You and your master both seem to have missed the point of the post and responded accordingly. Here, I'll make it simple for you: the reason why Assassin's easily brought up as a case study on how you should not be enforcing game rules goes as follows. (read ellonweb's post for some points on the subject too instead of simply trolling him, "troll").

Transparency of rules. Placing a support planet rule so vague that it can be enforced pretty much on case by case basis by a single more or less unchallenged entity. Support planet rule by definition was not transparent: it never really defined what a support planet was, this was up up the hunter to decide. Rules should be "easy enough" for everyone to understand: there should not be need for alliance leaders (say, Synthetic_Sid) to request a permission from a hunter for certain activity.

In this case an out of tag planet used in purpose of casually being included in the tag to donate resources and send defense fleets and then dispatched out to allow room for actual members wasn't a support planet. But a planet outside tag sending defenses was. This is the case of inconsistency which closely relates to our next case. Additionally, jumping in midround to add to rules could perhaps by some be seen as, well, questionable if not bluntly biased.

Which is bias. The blatant bias shown constantly (and yes others than Assassin do get the stick here too) by influential members (officers, high commanders) of alliances hopping in and out of the hunting team has been more a rule than an exception. Assassin again showed prime candidacy here by inconsistently enforcing a very nontransparent rule in favor of one political side and in disfavor of another.

This all leads to the conclusion that influential, affiliated members of the community should perhaps not be admitted to the task of chief MH because bias seems to be more or less inevitable - in addition to what ellonweb said.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ellonweb
I used my head and applied the rules sensibly and consistently without the need for the line being drawn and proscribed to the finest details, I didn't randomly choose which rules to enforce in different rounds.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Veedeejem
In the 20+ or so rounds I played planetarion I noticed alot of inconsistancies.
People get threated if they're high profile or not, high profile galaxy or not and ofc if the mh's like your alliance or not.

Some people or groups get away with ALOT more than others, that's just the way it is.
Indeed. There are cases very easy to put a pin on the bias and inconsistency on: eXilition's and 1up's different treatments by the same multihunter would be an easy to show example. History of inconsistency and bias is no reason to keep things inconsistent and biased for the future, though.



Quote:
Originally Posted by willzzz
Wasnt this the same game by the way which made killmark (i do love him but still we all know his history) perhaps one of the biggest known cheats in pa's history, the head mh of this game your reffering too?
If you'd be even borderline aware of the "cheat" history in Planetarion or "Tia", you wouldn't consider Killmark much more than a casual pest. Now, instead of yapping casual uneducated comments or fanboi drivel, which seem to be your "hobbies", what if you'd, yourself, or ask your master to, post something constructive on the subject. Cheers.
Tietäjä is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 30 Dec 2009, 22:21   #72
Assassin
PA Ancient
 
Assassin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Ventnor, Isle Of Wight
Posts: 1,060
Assassin has a brilliant futureAssassin has a brilliant futureAssassin has a brilliant futureAssassin has a brilliant futureAssassin has a brilliant futureAssassin has a brilliant futureAssassin has a brilliant futureAssassin has a brilliant futureAssassin has a brilliant futureAssassin has a brilliant futureAssassin has a brilliant future
Re: A plea to the multihunters

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tietäjä View Post
Ah of course, the fanboy. You and your master both seem to have missed the point of the post and responded accordingly. Here, I'll make it simple for you: the reason why Assassin's easily brought up as a case study on how you should not be enforcing game rules goes as follows. (read ellonweb's post for some points on the subject too instead of simply trolling him, "troll"). .
Right as you indeed did ask for a constructive post regarding these 'issues' you keep brining up (baring in mind i had at least 2-3 hour convos on irc with you regarding this issue at the time and still you insist on coming onto these forums every chance you get although you quit pa years ago to try and troll me seems i have to come on here again and point out to you the obvious) Ok.. so lets address what you have said in the first paragraph. Actually no, Willzzz didnt miss the point. He was reffering too (if you bothered to read the quote he used of you) the post you made with a witty one liner regarding me been stabbed. Was that clever or useful? No it wasnt. Hence why Willzzz obviously took offence so maybe you missed the point? So therefore, you cant really neg rep me and moan about my one line comment, when you reply EXACTLY the same way..

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tietäjä View Post
Transparency of rules. Placing a support planet rule so vague that it can be enforced pretty much on case by case basis by a single more or less unchallenged entity. Support planet rule by definition was not transparent: it never really defined what a support planet was, this was up up the hunter to decide. Rules should be "easy enough" for everyone to understand: there should not be need for alliance leaders (say, Synthetic_Sid) to request a permission from a hunter for certain activity. .
Ok now onto this.. the support planet rule was so vague and hard to understand although at least 3 quaters of the community seem to get it through my origonal post (can be found here: http://pirate.planetarion.com/showpo...13&postcount=1 this was the round 15 incident where i was forced to bring it in due to planets which were apparently 'scan planets' and had a grand total of 1 amp with no scan tech done what so ever, but had managed to have all eta reaserch done and build one mass ship type. Now incase this was still hard to grasp what we classed as a 'support planet' i tried to make it even more clear in the round 16 offical rules thread which can also be found here: http://pirate.planetarion.com/showpo...12&postcount=1 So surely how hard is this to grasp? The support planet rule was brought in to prevent people who didnt even really care about PA or what PA stood for (probably from another game all togther) been brought in by a certain alliance (at the time it was exi in mass) to signup free planets, and as i mentioned above build one ship in mass and have no scan reaserch done what so ever (but i was told as an excuse they were friends and scan planets) and were out of tag due to exi had hit its tag limit at the time. I have explained this to you then, and ive explained it too you now. Surely you dont need more explanation on what a support planet is? Now it has probably evolved and changed, due to i am no longer a MH and of course as we know rules do change and adapt over time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tietäjä View Post
In this case an out of tag planet used in purpose of casually being included in the tag to donate resources and send defense fleets and then dispatched out to allow room for actual members wasn't a support planet. But a planet outside tag sending defenses was. This is the case of inconsistency which closely relates to our next case. Additionally, jumping in midround to add to rules could perhaps by some be seen as, well, questionable if not bluntly biased.

Which is bias. The blatant bias shown constantly (and yes others than Assassin do get the stick here too) by influential members (officers, high commanders) of alliances hopping in and out of the hunting team has been more a rule than an exception. Assassin again showed prime candidacy here by inconsistently enforcing a very nontransparent rule in favor of one political side and in disfavor of another. .

Now, we move onto this part of your bs speech. I do recall the amount of bitching you gave me over this. The incident/alliance you are reffering to is of course 1up. So for others which have no idea what KJ is reffering too here 1up were hiding there numbers at the time. they didnt have a full tag bassically (they had say 40-50 members in the tag with the tag limit say been 70... thats the equilivent of what it would of been today) and yes they did add members to the tag to defend or donate to them for lossess. So can you still not see the difference between the 2 scanarios KJ? I had to explain this to you for hours on irc, then we had a fantastic debate about it on the forums where i couldnt challenge you due to the NDA.. but luckily for you i am no longer contracted to PA nore do i play it anymore so i am more then happy to come on here and shut you up.

First of all, what 1up did wasnt against the rules of the support planet rule. They were not a full tag. Exi were. 1up's players in question who were added to tag were actual players playing the game, not just 'friends' brought in for one round with one mass ship type claiming to be scanners. They were playing the actual game (think if you read my rules statement we do state if your saw as playing the game then it isnt against the rules? obviously you failed to read that bit all those years ago..) Second, they were NOT abusing anything or causing an unfair advantage while they were out of the tag, infact we didnt have any indication they were 1up members at all until they were added into the tag for whatever reason. So therefore how were they causing an unfair advantage and breaching the support planet rule which is purely for the reasons i mentioned in my first paragraph? (ie OUT OF TAG PLANETS!) Third what ever 1up did with those planets when they were inside the tag is no concern to me. I am not here to dictate what the HC can do with there own members once they are in the alliance tag. (unless of course they are farming or blatent multing) So how you can claim this is still to this day a breach of the support planet rule and 'bias' is beyond me. One alliance was a full tag and had over 40 planets/friends claiming to be scanners all building one ship type and mass defending/flack attacking, the other had half of its tag empty and kept adding planets when it suited there needs but while outside of the tag they didnt assosiate with the alliance itself what so ever with defence or attacking flak fleets and they WERE ACTUALLY PLAYING the game... ie incase you need a definition of this meaning they had full tech for eta, ships, mining and were found mostly in the top 200 ranks planet wise so.... do we have to continue bringing this old story back up?




Quote:
Originally Posted by Tietäjä View Post
If you'd be even borderline aware of the "cheat" history in Planetarion or "Tia", you wouldn't consider Killmark much more than a casual pest. Now, instead of yapping casual uneducated comments or fanboi drivel, which seem to be your "hobbies", what if you'd, yourself, or ask your master to, post something constructive on the subject. Cheers.

So was that constructive enough for you? Willzzz defended me becuase we are sick and tired of seeing you like a bitter broken anti me record. I have witnessed you post around 7 times in the past year roughly, at least 5 of those times have been regarding me been 'biased' in my history as MH manager in different threads all over these boards. I have been forced to again in public explain the 2 scanarios to you, which are so far apart even a blind man could see it. So i do appologise to the people off this thread that wanted to discuss somthing not relevent to the past or myself and KJ (and his persaonal vendetta against me) and i also appologise for my terrible english, i have gotten worse over the years. So KJ this will be the last time i speak of this incident or post a reply to you. You can therefore post another long winded speech of lies or posh jiberish with fancy words but i cant be arsed with you anymore. I have quit this game and thats the end of it. But i wouldnt change anything i did what so ever as a player, or as a member of the PA Team.
__________________
Played: Round 1-13. PA Team: Round 13-17. The Return: Round 18-19. PA Team: Round 20. Return.. Again: Round 21-37 Retired: Round 38 Returned: Round 39-45 Retired: Round 45 Returned: Round: 56

Ever been attacked by a p3nguin? You get left a bit black and white!

p3nguin Founder
Assassin is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 31 Dec 2009, 00:26   #73
Tietäjä
Good Son
 
Tietäjä's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Finland
Posts: 3,991
Tietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better place
Re: A plea to the multihunters

Quote:
Originally Posted by Assassin
Due to the rising tactic of registering a number of planets for the sole purpose of alliance defence that remain out of the alliance tag, we have been forced to make a rule change.
The reason for this is that the alliance limit is there for a reason. It is unfair on the smaller alliances and unbalanced the gameplay when a large alliance creates these dummy planets for the sole purpose of unofficially increasing the size of their alliance.
See two alliances practised this over different rounds - one was midround seized for it one wasn't punished. A rules enforcer joined the latter after abandoning his task as a hunter. I don't quite understand how you find that consistent and transparent rules and enforcement of such.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Assassin
Now, we move onto this part of your bs speech. I do recall the amount of bitching you gave me over this. The incident/alliance you are reffering to is of course 1up. So for others which have no idea what KJ is reffering too here 1up were hiding there numbers at the time. they didnt have a full tag bassically (they had say 40-50 members in the tag with the tag limit say been 70... thats the equilivent of what it would of been today) and yes they did add members to the tag to defend or donate to them for lossess. So can you still not see the difference between the 2 scanarios KJ?
I don't for gods understand what Kjel has to do with this - assuming KJ's a referance to him. I wouldn't know what else it'd be. 1up had more than 70 members at it's peak - this was said by a high commander of the said alliance. Some of them were just less active - old members being rotated in and out of the tag for resource donations and cameo defense fleet support early round. These extra planets were of course not in the final tag because they never accumulated score like regular members did. These are facts you could've asked from the resident high command as they claimed they were given a permission by the hunting team to do this. So a full tag may not have support planets but a not full tag may. This certainly explains it, if in both cases the number of planets sum up to over the limit (50 in tag, 50 outside tag at 70 limit, 70 in tag, 30 outside tag, 70 limit to make easy numbers). If you're arguing that the eXilition planets would have been closed because they weren't "real people playing real planets" then you should perhaps have accused them of multiple planets, account sharing, VNC, or whatever instead. If it does go along the line that "if your tag isn't full you may have excess planets outside tag working with you to exceed the alliance limit, but if your tag is full this may not be done" then obviously everything was forced correct - and very sensibly and consistently, to add to that. To underpin, 1up had planets that were never intended as "full members", and were circling in and out of the tag during the period when they were "masking their numbers". These planets defended 1up, donated resources, and aided in these means: the total numbers would have exceeded the limit at peak times, but the low flight planets used for early/first half of the round support were never going to, or never intended to, grow into fully fledged tag planets. Neither were eXilition's OOT support.

This is prime example of how to produce a nontransparent rule and enforce it inconsistently. I'm fairly certain most of the victimized in the case (here, eXilition) would agree with me, whilst the 1up side might not - you included. This is prime reasons why community members heavily affiliated into politics should not be allowed power over such descisions.
Tietäjä is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 31 Dec 2009, 03:17   #74
Judge
Doh!
 
Judge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit
Posts: 1,720
Judge is infamous around these parts
Re: A plea to the multihunters

As most people are aware, Butter and Myself have been added to the Multihunters on a trial basis this round *whether we are successful is another matter*
The last 2 weeks of the round, Butter and I spent hours going over the news and a fleet launches of all the top planets, from #1 to #100 plus a lot more. Our efforts were made into cases for the senior MH team to examine, then they decided on the outcomes.
We further spent at least 30 or more hours each looking at out of tag defence issues and again made cases and provided evidence.
My point being, is that we are painfully aware of the issues that have arisen this round and they have been looked at with utmost scrutiny.
The final acts (decisions ) are not straight forward nor is the evidence always definitive, but we make the effort and do our best.
And that is all anyone can ask of us.
Judge is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 31 Dec 2009, 04:48   #75
Knight Theamion
Miles Teg
 
Knight Theamion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Dom City
Posts: 5,192
Knight Theamion is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himKnight Theamion is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himKnight Theamion is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himKnight Theamion is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himKnight Theamion is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himKnight Theamion is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himKnight Theamion is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himKnight Theamion is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himKnight Theamion is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himKnight Theamion is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himKnight Theamion is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like him
Re: A plea to the multihunters

How the **** did you miss to address the planets that were clearly over their limit and already warned, using the evidence and intel Hanzi collected?

Really, how in the hell did you **** that up? Or are you saying you and butter are just incompetent? (in my mind butter is anyway, so nothing new there).

Explain that please.
__________________
Audentes Fortuna Iuvat
Knight Theamion is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 31 Dec 2009, 08:02   #76
t3k
The Video Guy
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,279
t3k has a reputation beyond reputet3k has a reputation beyond reputet3k has a reputation beyond reputet3k has a reputation beyond reputet3k has a reputation beyond reputet3k has a reputation beyond reputet3k has a reputation beyond reputet3k has a reputation beyond reputet3k has a reputation beyond reputet3k has a reputation beyond reputet3k has a reputation beyond repute
Re: A plea to the multihunters

While I'm not bragging... it was brought to my attention that I'd exceeded the OOT def rule. I hadn't done it intentionally; ignorance not excusing however. Even so, I expected to receive a warning from Multihunters, but infact heard nothing further on the matter. I stopped defending OOT anyway; a self-imposed sanction by means of making up for breaking a rule.

I must admit though, I don't feel any sort of relief for being 'let off' - I'm just as disappointed in MH's inability to uphold the rules when required. Instead they spend their time closing people who've used the wrong signup information (who are clearly imposing a far greater disadvantage over their opponents than somebody who is defending non-allied planets more often than they should be).

To be honest, I think PA is shit. I like Appocomaster, but his RL stops him from being able to contribute to PA as much as I know he'd like to. Cin is just a fairly useless code-jockey, capable of maintaining without any drastic gameplay innovations. MH team all act on personal whim with little care for the rules, instead looking for ways the EULA can help them punish those that they don't like.

PATeam is lucky to still have the playerbase it does - and I mean 'lucky' in the strongest possible terms. They've done nothing for over 4 years that has earned them the business they continually get round in/round out.

I want 2010 to be the year that we, the PA community, get to celebrate a new Spinner game so we can finally drop this dead donkey (and all the asses on Staff) once and for all.
__________________
Writing lists and taking names.
t3k is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 31 Dec 2009, 11:51   #77
Tietäjä
Good Son
 
Tietäjä's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Finland
Posts: 3,991
Tietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better place
Re: A plea to the multihunters

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenny
To be honest, I think PA is shit. I like Appocomaster, but his RL stops him from being able to contribute to PA as much as I know he'd like to. Cin is just a fairly useless code-jockey, capable of maintaining without any drastic gameplay innovations. MH team all act on personal whim with little care for the rules, instead looking for ways the EULA can help them punish those that they don't like.
This is a really good description of the situation at large.If the EULA doesn't have it already, you can always add some.
Tietäjä is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 31 Dec 2009, 12:57   #78
Knight Theamion
Miles Teg
 
Knight Theamion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Dom City
Posts: 5,192
Knight Theamion is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himKnight Theamion is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himKnight Theamion is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himKnight Theamion is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himKnight Theamion is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himKnight Theamion is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himKnight Theamion is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himKnight Theamion is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himKnight Theamion is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himKnight Theamion is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himKnight Theamion is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like him
Re: A plea to the multihunters

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenny View Post
To be honest, I think PA is shit. I like Appocomaster, but his RL stops him from being able to contribute to PA as much as I know he'd like to. Cin is just a fairly useless code-jockey, capable of maintaining without any drastic gameplay innovations. MH team all act on personal whim with little care for the rules, instead looking for ways the EULA can help them punish those that they don't like.
qft.
__________________
Audentes Fortuna Iuvat
Knight Theamion is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 31 Dec 2009, 13:24   #79
HaNzI
Apprime Troll HC
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 857
HaNzI has a spectacular aura aboutHaNzI has a spectacular aura aboutHaNzI has a spectacular aura about
Re: A plea to the multihunters

Quote:
Originally Posted by Judge View Post
As most people are aware, Butter and Myself have been added to the Multihunters on a trial basis this round *whether we are successful is another matter*
The last 2 weeks of the round, Butter and I spent hours going over the news and a fleet launches of all the top planets, from #1 to #100 plus a lot more. Our efforts were made into cases for the senior MH team to examine, then they decided on the outcomes.
We further spent at least 30 or more hours each looking at out of tag defence issues and again made cases and provided evidence.
My point being, is that we are painfully aware of the issues that have arisen this round and they have been looked at with utmost scrutiny.
The final acts (decisions ) are not straight forward nor is the evidence always definitive, but we make the effort and do our best.
And that is all anyone can ask of us.

If this is true, then it is clear that the head multihunter or pa-team failed in this one. You had a conversation with me where you said they most likely would need to break the rule by miles to get closed. You also said they would atleast get a warning if they broke the rule, and therefore not being allowed to defend out of tag for atleast another week. I dont judge you (hehe) at all as it seems like you took my complaints seriously, i neither doubt you actually believed they would get atleast a warning. My real purpose with reporting all those planets was actually to prevent them from defending the next week, which is why i came back to #multihunters because i expected someone to issue a warning to all the planets in question.

Because the rule was not enforced, and even not giving out a warning for breaking it, the MH department successfully managed to create a huge unfair advantage. We still won anyways but thats not the problem, we used a lot of time organizing the hits on a particular alliance even though we knew we had no chance to land as long as a bunch of other alliances defended them out of tag.

So again, if judge and butter did spend all that time actually doing what they are there for, all Ace needed to do was to make a sensible decission. ATLEAST ISSUE A DAMN WARNING.
HaNzI is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 31 Dec 2009, 13:35   #80
_Kila_
break it down!
 
_Kila_'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,087
_Kila_ is a pillar of this Internet society_Kila_ is a pillar of this Internet society_Kila_ is a pillar of this Internet society_Kila_ is a pillar of this Internet society_Kila_ is a pillar of this Internet society_Kila_ is a pillar of this Internet society_Kila_ is a pillar of this Internet society_Kila_ is a pillar of this Internet society_Kila_ is a pillar of this Internet society_Kila_ is a pillar of this Internet society_Kila_ is a pillar of this Internet society
Re: A plea to the multihunters

Quote:
Originally Posted by Willzzz View Post
Wasnt this the same game by the way which made killmark (i do love him but still we all know his history) perhaps one of the biggest known cheats in pa's history, the head mh of this game your reffering too?
Someone who knows how to cheat is likely to know how to catch other cheats, no?
What interest does he have in cheating if he is head of MH?
__________________
I put the sex in dyslexia!
_Kila_ is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 31 Dec 2009, 14:06   #81
JonnyBGood
Banned
 
JonnyBGood's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Further to the right
Posts: 19,441
JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: A plea to the multihunters

Quote:
Originally Posted by Assassin
First of all, what 1up did wasnt against the rules of the support planet rule. They were not a full tag. Exi were.
It's worth pointing out that in r19 yggdra was closed for defending exi from out of tag when they were miles under the tag limit. Dunno who was head MH then though.

Also keizari is right, 1up, combining all the real planets who ended up in tag and the "fake" ones who were just there to make up the numbers, were definitely over the tag limit in r17. This was the whole point of the argument at the time. Maybe if someone who was an officer or HC in 1up that round is still reading the forums they can confirm that! I mean why would sid even bother asking if they weren't? Ascendancy had done exactly the same thing the previous round with hiding people out of tag when we were under the tag limit.

Edit: Found it

Quote:
Originally Posted by Synthetic_Sid View Post
So who was in our tag if some of our members were outside it? The closest anyone came in this thread was the idea that we'd accepted random applicants. In fact we'd accepted people who weren't playing this round: ex-1ups taking the round off, ex-players who quit rounds ago etc. Essentially people who we could rely on not to do anything stupid (like blab on AD what was happening, or actually play their planets). None of these planets ever sent defence to 1up or attacked with 1up. None of them are even in our arbiter - and looking at their scores I'd say the majority of them don't have a single ship.
Pretty much an acknowledgement that between <planetswhoareintag> and <eventual1upmembers> they were well over 60 (I believe that was the tag limit that round). Obviously these planets didn't do anything attacking/defending wise (at least so far as sid says), dunno about resource donations like keizari mentioned.

Re-edit, found more

Quote:
Originally Posted by mazzelaar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wishmaster
Got a guy in gal now which says he has been donating res to 1up tag entire round, and will now start playing when he has been kicked from tag. and asking for res to do so.

Not saying its cheating..but imo its in the grey area.
It's not a grey area either, it was checked with PA Team prior to it taking place.

The planet in question will not be asking for donations from 1up as they are no longer in the tag. They will also not being participating in any kind of attacking or defending with 1up, so I fail to see the problem either you or Robban have.

And another one, in response to the same point (on page 6 of that thread), pretty hilarious considering people who were legitimately scanning for multiple alliances from out of tag were later (r22) closed for it


Quote:
Originally Posted by Bashar
What's wrong with it? Yes, it made us look weaker than we were and directed attention away from us as it was intended to, but it was a massive risk. A coordinated attack on our out of tag planets would have screwed us over pretty badly. Just because other alliances decided that, instead of pushing us when our trousers were down, they'd stare out our hairy arse like perverts doesn't mean the tactic should be invalid.

As for the resources being donated, these were used by scanners. Would people complain if an alliance setup a seperate tag for scanners (as has been done before) and let people join to donate resources? I doubt people would even notice and I know I wouldn't, distorters are the biggest pain in the arse and biggest imbalance in the game (but this is a seperate issue).

If anyone still believes the support planet rule was anything other than a complete heap of shit please, for the sake of the human race, avoid breeding.
__________________
Some might ask what good is life without purpose but I'm anticipating a good lunch.

Last edited by JonnyBGood; 31 Dec 2009 at 14:38.
JonnyBGood is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 31 Dec 2009, 17:43   #82
Assassin
PA Ancient
 
Assassin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Ventnor, Isle Of Wight
Posts: 1,060
Assassin has a brilliant futureAssassin has a brilliant futureAssassin has a brilliant futureAssassin has a brilliant futureAssassin has a brilliant futureAssassin has a brilliant futureAssassin has a brilliant futureAssassin has a brilliant futureAssassin has a brilliant futureAssassin has a brilliant futureAssassin has a brilliant future
Re: A plea to the multihunters

Ill sumarise this all with a fewsentence tbh. They hadnt reached there full tag limit AS SHOWN by the fact there whole alliance wasnt in tag which sid did say in your quote as they were more or less hiding there strengh. As i did post to keiz, the planets outside of tag didnt associate with 1up what so ever until they were allowed into tag therefore were NOT causing an unfair advantage or breaching the support planet rule (AGAIN brought in for the sole purpose of freebie planets building one ship type in mass and flaking for one individual alliance which they were not in tag for and were apparenbtly 'scanners' but didnt have any scan tech done and didnt have 1 single scan to there name... go figure)
__________________
Played: Round 1-13. PA Team: Round 13-17. The Return: Round 18-19. PA Team: Round 20. Return.. Again: Round 21-37 Retired: Round 38 Returned: Round 39-45 Retired: Round 45 Returned: Round: 56

Ever been attacked by a p3nguin? You get left a bit black and white!

p3nguin Founder
Assassin is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 31 Dec 2009, 19:43   #83
Tietäjä
Good Son
 
Tietäjä's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Finland
Posts: 3,991
Tietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better place
Re: A plea to the multihunters

Quote:
Originally Posted by Assassin View Post
Ill sumarise this all with a fewsentence tbh. They hadnt reached there full tag limit AS SHOWN by the fact there whole alliance wasnt in tag which sid did say in your quote as they were more or less hiding there strengh. As i did post to keiz, the planets outside of tag didnt associate with 1up what so ever until they were allowed into tag therefore were NOT causing an unfair advantage or breaching the support planet rule (AGAIN brought in for the sole purpose of freebie planets building one ship type in mass and flaking for one individual alliance which they were not in tag for and were apparenbtly 'scanners' but didnt have any scan tech done and didnt have 1 single scan to there name... go figure)
They were allowed in and out of the tag, they were rotating the "not really playing" planets out and in of the tag: additionally, which was the crux of the tactic, to which you'd probably also find proof if you dug logs or asked around, is that these freebie planets were occasionally allowed into the tag to donate resources. This is the point: while you can argue that there was military activity, although not in the width of eXilition's (there were out of tag planets defending into the tag for 1up and vice versa: this can be proven by scans. whether these were real planets or "not playing for real" planets is a question only the players and perhaps sid/mazzelaar can answer). I consider extra planets donating resources "support". You probably don't.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wishmaster
Got a guy in gal now which says he has been donating res to 1up tag entire round
Straightforward military action never was the reason why I'd keep on about the support rule in this case: it was the resource donations, which happened on a very broad scale - you'd found a lot of people like the one wishmaster'd refered to here. Of course, this was legit because the multihunters had allowed it preround - later on, after I asked Assassin (and Squishy I think?), nobody remembered any 1up command person ever asking about such a thing, and everyone denied ever allowing them to pull such a stunt off. I asked if I was allowed to have 200 planets of friends and family simply donating resources to an alliance tag to heap the resources on one planet late round to pull off a top100 with it, and it was denied as per the support planet rule. I mean, c'mon.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Assassin
. So KJ this will be the last time i speak of this incident or post a reply to you. You can therefore post another long winded speech of lies or posh jiberish with fancy words but i cant be arsed with you anymore.
Quilt forcing you defensive even though you said you're done, no?

Quote:
Originally Posted by JBG
If anyone still believes the support planet rule was anything other than a complete heap of shit please, for the sake of the human race, avoid breeding.
This. It was a very, very vaguely defined rule, which was, over the rounds, enforced very, very inconsistently by even the same multihunters, plugged on and off every now and then - and frankly, nobody bar perhaps the creator of the rule had a clue of it's purpose and reason.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JBG
It's worth pointing out that in r19 yggdra was closed for defending exi from out of tag when they were miles under the tag limit. Dunno who was head MH then though.
Several eXilition scanners/cov-oppers were being roasted by the multihunting team during round 18 for being "support planets" - they were not in the eXilition tag (because they were essentially scanners; they didn't have any real fleet either), but they were persistently performing covert operations on 1up planets to harrass their gameplay. A couple were threatened with closure - Omen, not having had a full tag by then, and our ties to 1up being severed by Sid's inability to control SubH (a promise of a pact to attack eXilition together with 1up, Omen, and Subh consequently lead to Subh attacking Omen), found affiliation with eXilition and hosted these scanners in the Omen tag in order to provide them with a shelter to operate from with exchange to them performing scans for us.


ps. happy new year kids

Last edited by Tietäjä; 31 Dec 2009 at 19:56.
Tietäjä is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 31 Dec 2009, 21:13   #84
Assassin
PA Ancient
 
Assassin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Ventnor, Isle Of Wight
Posts: 1,060
Assassin has a brilliant futureAssassin has a brilliant futureAssassin has a brilliant futureAssassin has a brilliant futureAssassin has a brilliant futureAssassin has a brilliant futureAssassin has a brilliant futureAssassin has a brilliant futureAssassin has a brilliant futureAssassin has a brilliant futureAssassin has a brilliant future
Re: A plea to the multihunters

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tietäjä View Post
They were allowed in and out of the tag, they were rotating the "not really playing" planets out and in of the tag: additionally, which was the crux of the tactic, to which you'd probably also find proof if you dug logs or asked around, is that these freebie planets were occasionally allowed into the tag to donate resources. This is the point: while you can argue that there was military activity, although not in the width of eXilition's (there were out of tag planets defending into the tag for 1up and vice versa: this can be proven by scans. whether these were real planets or "not playing for real" planets is a question only the players and perhaps sid/mazzelaar can answer). I consider extra planets donating resources "support". You probably don't.



Straightforward military action never was the reason why I'd keep on about the support rule in this case: it was the resource donations, which happened on a very broad scale - you'd found a lot of people like the one wishmaster'd refered to here. Of course, this was legit because the multihunters had allowed it preround - later on, after I asked Assassin (and Squishy I think?), nobody remembered any 1up command person ever asking about such a thing, and everyone denied ever allowing them to pull such a stunt off. I asked if I was allowed to have 200 planets of friends and family simply donating resources to an alliance tag to heap the resources on one planet late round to pull off a top100 with it, and it was denied as per the support planet rule. I mean, c'mon.




Quilt forcing you defensive even though you said you're done, no?



This. It was a very, very vaguely defined rule, which was, over the rounds, enforced very, very inconsistently by even the same multihunters, plugged on and off every now and then - and frankly, nobody bar perhaps the creator of the rule had a clue of it's purpose and reason.



Several eXilition scanners/cov-oppers were being roasted by the multihunting team during round 18 for being "support planets" - they were not in the eXilition tag (because they were essentially scanners; they didn't have any real fleet either), but they were persistently performing covert operations on 1up planets to harrass their gameplay. A couple were threatened with closure - Omen, not having had a full tag by then, and our ties to 1up being severed by Sid's inability to control SubH (a promise of a pact to attack eXilition together with 1up, Omen, and Subh consequently lead to Subh attacking Omen), found affiliation with eXilition and hosted these scanners in the Omen tag in order to provide them with a shelter to operate from with exchange to them performing scans for us.


ps. happy new year kids



Perhaps the reason why i have to keep posting is becuase your posting the same drival over and over again READ MY POSTS! THEY WERE NOT A FULL TAG! AND THE PLANETS OUTSIDE OF THE TAG WHICH THEY WERE THEN ALLOWING IN WERE NOT I REPEAT SO MAYBE YOU CAN UNDERSTAND.. WERE NOT! ATTACKING OR DEFENDING OR HAVING ANY COMMUNICATION WITH THE 1UP MEMBERS OR THE TAG WHAT SO EVER UNTIL THEY WERE ADDED IN FOR WHAT EVER REASON!

I never once either denied to you sid had asked me about this.. why would i? it was a legit tactic, they risked having there star players outside the alliance without any protection for defence or resources. They didnt even attack togther on some occassions hence why us (the mh team with all the tools we had which we could bassicaly see every fleet movement they made and compare them to every other planet in the whole of pa.... yes we have better intel/tools then your arbitters.. shame you dont realize that) couldnt penalize them because they were not interacting. They were not hopping in and out of tag like you put it one bit. I saw at max 4 of which i did speak to sid again regarding them joining the tag and leaving again. If i have to drag back that old log AGAIN just becuase you cant let this go and fail to understand the 2 scanarios been different i will be forced too. You speak of biase when i dont even think you know what that word means. 1up beat you with a tactic you didnt think off and one which wasnt against the rules. You hated the support planet rule as a whole and hated 1up even more so therefore put all your hatred and blame onto others 'allowing' them to win.

Furhter more your drival regarding the scanners been punished... seriously. Your really like a broken record. WE (IE MYSELF AND SQUISHY) NEVER ONCE I REPEAT ONCE PENALISED SCANNERS if they were of course scanners. We made that clear, on ever level. So much so when achiles was closed (or some other member of trans a few rounds ago?) i defended them against the current MH team on the forums and publicaly becuase when i was in charge we never EVER enforced this rule to effect scanners (ie go read the thread i gave you in the other thread you chose to blatently ignore regarding round 16 rules) read the bit entitled 'SCANNERS' and youll see this again... and again... and again we NEVER penalised scanners. Not even for been outside of the tag IF they were scanning ONLY! (plus ofc a scanner does cov op that was included)


And for the final time before you come on here agasin like a dam broken record spitting out more tripe then the canned food version READ my replies and stop choosing to ignore them, add more fancy words and post the exact same shite you posted before..


Happy new year
__________________
Played: Round 1-13. PA Team: Round 13-17. The Return: Round 18-19. PA Team: Round 20. Return.. Again: Round 21-37 Retired: Round 38 Returned: Round 39-45 Retired: Round 45 Returned: Round: 56

Ever been attacked by a p3nguin? You get left a bit black and white!

p3nguin Founder
Assassin is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2 Jan 2010, 13:14   #85
JonnyBGood
Banned
 
JonnyBGood's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Further to the right
Posts: 19,441
JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: A plea to the multihunters

Quote:
Originally Posted by Assassin View Post
Ill sumarise this all with a fewsentence tbh. They hadnt reached there full tag limit AS SHOWN by the fact there whole alliance wasnt in tag which sid did say in your quote as they were more or less hiding there strengh. As i did post to keiz, the planets outside of tag didnt associate with 1up what so ever until they were allowed into tag therefore were NOT causing an unfair advantage or breaching the support planet rule (AGAIN brought in for the sole purpose of freebie planets building one ship type in mass and flaking for one individual alliance which they were not in tag for and were apparenbtly 'scanners' but didnt have any scan tech done and didnt have 1 single scan to there name... go figure)
I thought any breach of the alliance size limit, even if it is effectively just hiding your strength, was what the support planet rule was introduced to prohibit? 1up's extra members, and that's what they were, It was a deliberately chosen tactic, otherwise they'd have just not had a tag the whole time. They were using the extra planets to provide an inaccurate picture of their strength. Fair enough, you decided that wasn't illegal but it doesn't mean that they were under the alliance tag limit if you include <eventual1upmembers> and <randomerswhoareintag>, as I said earlier.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Assassin
They didnt even attack togther on some occassions
In the same thread that I linked to above sid (or mazz, I forget which one of them) specifically states that 1up did still attack together. It's also said that def wasn't organised beyond the normal members doing it themselves (which is backed up by keizari who, in that thread, states that the spiders of certain 1up planets were often eta 8 to each other).

Edit: I looked it up and apparently cin was head MH in r19
__________________
Some might ask what good is life without purpose but I'm anticipating a good lunch.
JonnyBGood is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2 Jan 2010, 17:01   #86
Tietäjä
Good Son
 
Tietäjä's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Finland
Posts: 3,991
Tietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better place
Re: A plea to the multihunters

Quote:
Originally Posted by JBG
It's also said that def wasn't organised beyond the normal members doing it themselves (which is backed up by keizari who, in that thread, states that the spiders of certain 1up planets were often eta 8 to each other).
Most certainly, though, the support planet rule should not be looking at who ordered or requested the defenses to be sent, I mean, does it make a difference if it's a "normal member" or an "alliance officer" in terms of whether it's legit or not?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Assassin View Post
Perhaps the reason why i have to keep posting is becuase your posting the same drival over and over again READ MY POSTS! THEY WERE NOT A FULL TAG!
So if you have 20 members in tag and 300 members outside tag, you'd not been classified "support", because you'd not be above tag limit. Then, if of these 300 planets outside tag, 200 were to be rotated in and out of the tag over a 24 hour period in order to donate resources for the tag, it'd not be support, because it'd not been over the tag limit at any point. Fair. Caps locking it in a face to the keyboard with drool spilling fashion doesn't make you look any smarter, really.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Round 17 EULA
(f) Support Accounts are accounts which are dedicated to undertaking specific
and repeated actions which result in an unfair benefit for a
planet/organisation, where an organisation is defined as an alliance or galaxy.
Here. Let me open this up for you. If you had a tag of 60 people out of limit 70, and 50 people outside tag, rotating three people into the tag at a time to send defenses, and then instantly kicking them, it'd not be against the rules because the tag'd never be full. In similar fashion, it would not be against the EULA to do the same with aforementioned resource donations. It would become against the EULA though, if your tag was "full". Is this soon starting to sound inconsistent or nontransparent to anyone else but me?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sid
So who was in our tag if some of our members were outside it? The closest anyone came in this thread was the idea that we'd accepted random applicants. In fact we'd accepted people who weren't playing this round: ex-1ups taking the round off, ex-players who quit rounds ago etc. Essentially people who we could rely on not to do anything stupid (like blab on AD what was happening, or actually play their planets).

At present there are 60 "proper" members of 1up
There were more of them, if you include the "not proper" members - which were sometimes inside the tag, sometimes outside - and were interacting in a casual fashion as dictated by members of 1up, not officers. Notice the the fact that these "extra planets" were not even "actual players playing the game" - look for your quote under! Exchange one mass ship type with mass resource donations and you're on the nail.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Assassin
First of all, what 1up did wasnt against the rules of the support planet rule. They were not a full tag. Exi were. 1up's players in question who were added to tag were actual players playing the game, not just 'friends' brought in for one round with one mass ship type claiming to be scanners.
Notice how Sid puts the "proper" members. As you yourself say, eXi planets above the allowed member count were not proper planets. They were building certain ships to defend, covert operating at some rounds, and so forth. Of course, this is different, because only military action by eXilition is deemed support: what you're refusing to say, is, that "not proper planets" rotated into the tag repeatedly to donating resources, as in dedicated to undertaking specific and repeated actions which result in an unfair benefit for a planet/organisation, where an organisation is defined as an alliance.

This action - as described, extra planets consisting of "friends and family" "not really playing" donating resources to the tag was confirmed by multihunters as legit activity not breaking the EULA quoted above, hence repeat resource donations were not support, repeat fleet activity was. Consistency? Transparency? Bias? Read the EULA quoted carefully, again.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wishmaster
Got a guy in gal now which says he has been donating res to 1up tag entire round, and will now start playing when he has been kicked from tag. and asking for res to do so.

Not saying its cheating..but imo its in the grey area.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mazzelaar
It's not a grey area either, it was checked with PA Team prior to it taking place.
60 "proper members"? Plus unannounced number of "checked".

Quote:
Originally Posted by jerome
i agree with wishie that if exi used the donation thing they would've been hounded. i can't think of even one half-reasonable reason why the PAteam allow it. i mean it's funny really, considering all the 1up players talking about playing pa "the way it was meant to be played" - good job! don't get me wrong, i have nothing against the action itself as it's legal and using all ingame features legally to improve yourself in innovative fashion is always great in my eyes, but hypocrisy is just as fantastic too
Wait! I'm not the only one finding this mess both inconsistent and biased. What on earth! Gasp! Let's just put the nail on this coffin by quoting the fabled Synthetic some more.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Synthetic_Sid
Let me explain just how screwed up PA team's definition of support planets is. The following scenario was cleared before the round by PA team. Not to 1up - but to a different alliance.

Alliance has 59 members + 1 scanner in tag and a bunch more scanners out of tag.
Alliance regularly rotates the scanners IN the tag tag so they can be donated to for scans.

Because the scanner is IN the tag when the donation is made, everything is legal.

Similarly, an alliance could have:

59 members in tag, 100 donation planets out of tag.
As needed you accept a donation planet into tag - they donate - then kick them ready for next one.

Because the donations all happen while in the tag everyhting's fine - as whilst out of the tag they aren't supporting the alliance in any way.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Assassin
I saw at max 4 of which i did speak to sid again regarding them joining the tag and leaving again
Awkward. Then either Sid's pulling shit out of his hat for no particular reason or a mongrel caught in a corner is coming up with a makeshift lie to guard his back. Who'd know.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Synthetic_Sid
This is precisely WHY 1up members were instructed not to post on AD about 1up - as you don't know all the facts so end up making an idiot of yourself. Yes, some of the planet in tag DID donate resources to the fund - some of them donated quite a lot.
Quite a lot. Quite a lot. Of course, despite these planets having been in tag - planets such as the one Wishmaster speaks of - weren't counted to the "60 proper players" because they weren't qualified as "proper players" by Sid's definition.


Let's be ****ing blunt here. Both 1up and eXilition had more planets than the tag could fit (if you count exilition's out of tag defense planets and 1up's in/and out of tag resource donation planets as planets in the first place). The differences were: exilition's tag was full, 1up's wasn't. 1up was receiving repeated resource donations, exilition was receiving defense fleets. One action was deemed punishable offense, one wasn't. I'm gonna quote your favourite fanboi for this, Assassin. I'm doing it to elaborate that on the light that there were more than 60 planets total - counting in the "not proper" planets. What does your fanboi and knight in shining armor think of repeated resource donations as per R17 EULA? The fact that, as italics, the planets were inside the tag was only game mechanically possible because some of the "proper planets" at the same time were outside the tag.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Willzzz
(f) Support Accounts are accounts which are dedicated to undertaking specific
and repeated actions which result in an unfair benefit for a
planet/organisation, where an organisation is defined as an alliance or galaxy.

Now thats what the eula says. Which to me justifies that planets, that are created to collect resources, join alliances, donate and then are kicked is saw as an unfair benefit for an alliance? But if they were always part of the alliance tag for example yes they cant be touched. As they are then part of the alliance.

That was ofc by Sid. Now, as i said ealier the eula doesnt claim they have to be within or out of the tag. So this explanation by sid to me has no relevence to this at all. If there not actually in tag other then for 1 tick to donate nearly 10 mil of resources then they ARE supplying an unfair advantage are they not? The fund can then ofc be donated to the members in the tag ect. Which is an unfair advantage. And as far as the PA Team approving it, he said they told ANOTHER alliance not himself. That doesnt solid enough evidence to me that they approved it. Perhaps we could get a PA team member to clarify it or perhaps you could name the alliance that was told this?
The latter Willzzz quote has to do with his opinion on what this post defines earlier and quotes Sid on "what's acceptable and whatnot" in terms of resource donations.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Assassin round 17
Now as far as im aware thats the only time i have approved anything to do with donations, and it wasnt for this subject. Everytime somone has came to me and asked if it is allowed for a planet, say with nothing but a few roids, no ships, they join the tag to donate funds then leave within a few ticks as allowed i have told them 'NO' As personaly that is an unfair advantage

Quote:
Originally Posted by Assassin round 17
Ok so it seems a member of the PA Team has told jester that it is allowed for somone to join an alliance donate resources to then leave. Well i am here to clairfy that myself or Squishy (the MH and deputy manager) have never approved of this from the start of the round till now.
This is quality. I mean, I'm so confused I can't really get a grasp of it. Help me Assassin, please, to understand your consistency, transparency, and all that... I mean c'mon.




On a sidenote.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Assassin
Not even for been outside of the tag IF they were scanning ONLY! (plus ofc a scanner does cov op that was included)
See regards to this you'll have to ask round 18 multihunters and the eXilition scanner odihnitoru why he was in the Omen tag that round. This is again simply to elaborate why the support planet rune was an utter disaster in all it's inconsistency.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Tietäjä
Allright.
9 million resources in the fund; 60k value.
An average "help" planet having 20 structures (30k value), you have 2 (1 security center, 1 factory), 3k value. You have 3 roids (600 value), each of them has 200 (40k value). Hence, you have about 67k less value than an average help planet has, plus their resource hoards.

Donation clear, fund empty. "Help" planets donate more to the fund. You hide your resources using the production feature, and you're back down to value given by your 2 structures and 3 roids. You have 9 million resources around, but they're hidden. Repeat. 18 million. Repeat. 27 million. Repeat. 36 million. Repeat. 45 million. (which is already 450 k turned into raw fleet). Is my logic flawed?

At the point where the "help" planets have larger resource hoards, you can just donate a lot larger chunks in a doze, and then hide them again to repeat the process.
Subsequently, donations to alliance fund in the lé Keizari or lé 1up fashion were blocked because they were deemed abuse of the alliance fund. So a repeat of what 1up did was no longer possible post round 17.

Last edited by Tietäjä; 2 Jan 2010 at 17:12.
Tietäjä is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2 Jan 2010, 18:33   #87
JonnyBGood
Banned
 
JonnyBGood's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Further to the right
Posts: 19,441
JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: A plea to the multihunters

Quote:
The differences were: exilition's tag was full, 1up's wasn't.
After browsing through a few AD threads I saw that 1up were, prior to the "real planets" being added to tag, on 58 members.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ska View Post
If I was in Omen I would be saying the same thing. "1up is untagged" (somehow with 58 people in tag...?)

Makes for a 'good' reason for other alliances not to attack. Particularly when omen has an 8k roid lead on #2
This was on the 18th May. On the 24th of May 1up added their proper members to tag apparently.

In fairness as regards the r18 scanner thing I'm relatively sure that it was related to cov-op planets and that's why exi out of tag planets were closed/threatened with being closed. I could be wrong though in fairness, and if keiz remembers something more concrete fair enough. I do definitely remember yggdra being closed in r19 when exi were miles under the tag limit, which goes to show that it really was a horrible rule if there are as many different interpretations of it as there are multihunters.

Is the support planet rule going to stay in the EULA by the way? Considering that defending is now hardcoded, scanning from out of tag is fine and trying to legislate who could attack who would be retarded to the point where I'd quit pa in despair is it still in the EULA just because everyone forgot about it?
__________________
Some might ask what good is life without purpose but I'm anticipating a good lunch.

Last edited by JonnyBGood; 2 Jan 2010 at 18:40.
JonnyBGood is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 2 Jan 2010, 18:54   #88
Tietäjä
Good Son
 
Tietäjä's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Finland
Posts: 3,991
Tietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better place
Re: A plea to the multihunters

I can't remember the exact numbers, and I can't say what was being added at what pace, because it was so well executed that, for a complete outsider unfamiliar with what was going on, it'd been truly shocking. The tag score went up dramatically, of course, these kicked planets were no "real 1up members" so this sort of stuff makes no difference, right.


Quote:
In fairness as regards the r18 scanner thing I'm relatively sure that it was related to cov-op planets and that's why exi out of tag planets were closed/threatened with being closed. I could be wrong though in fairness, and if keiz remembers something more concrete fair enough. I do definitely remember yggdra being closed in r19 when exi were miles under the tag limit, which goes to show that it really was a horrible rule if there are as many different interpretations of it as there are multihunters.
No, Odihnitoru was a scanner/cov-opper, he joined something along midround, due to resident hunter of that round (fiery, perhaps?) having threatened to launch at him for consistently cov-opping 1up. He wasn't a high amp scanner, but he was a cathaar scanner, and hence had access to relatively broad tech tree relatively early, thus the scanning-and-coverting. (To clarify, I'm aware this wasn't Assassin's doings, but why I'm including this is because it represents a strict polarity to what Assassin said was fair and good just the previous round: to point out the swings in how rules are enforced and decided, and how much - if too much - it depends on the MH in question).




Quote:
Is the support planet rule going to stay in the EULA by the way? Considering that defending is now hardcoded, scanning from out of tag is fine and trying to legislate who could attack who would be retarded to the point where I'd quit pa in despair is it still in the EULA just because everyone forgot about it?
Hopefully it'll be sent back to where it came from - it's proven one of the most notorious, poorly written, and poorly thought pieces of EULA in the history of the game.
Tietäjä is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 14:50.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2002 - 2018