If you attack a fief with an army in it, and win, the remaining defending troops should all be dead no?Yes it is.
Thats the game mechanics right?
lol
same thing in
Mechin
Population: 211
Owner: Nord_ThunderMaster
Army: 2875
Gold: 27504
Price: 23
S&D: 3038
only now Nord Thunder there is a grey faction member hmmm... hahaha man....
only now Nord Thunder there is a grey faction member hmmm... hahaha man....
If you attack a fief with an army in it, and win, the remaining defending troops should all be dead no?
Thats the game mechanics right?
Tosdhar
Population: 300
Owner: Kubel_the_Grey
Army: 1998
Gold: 30465
Price: 25
S&D: 529
Another thing happen with the multi account equipment, Somehow the greys saved there troops inside Tosdhar after the battle.
Greys making a fake faction and attack them-self, i though that was ban-able ?
So meaning they saving all from the bann accounts and even hack glich disconcet in that battle to save ur troops.
Im standing outside ready to attack, following the normality in strat rules. Its very sad. I was attacking him after battle and that even dont work.
He was attacker towards tosdhar and after battle the next 5 min i tried attack him at 0 range and nothing happen.
FFS is all i have to say.
Basicly i think this is the same as what fallens got the carpet for wasn't it ?
No fallen get carped cause locking their own fief against hospitaller/occitan invasion they tryed to buy time making us starve and try to get more shit in their fief as gold/troops/equipements.. in this case live with it ginger the grey guys got banned cause lots of people were complaning about multi acounting wish chadz did a ban wave. It is rigth if they really do and use multi account. IN this case they cant switch owner fief since the guys is global ban....live with it....also i have seem merc and coalition menber do it aswell this round to switch owner fief by getting someone in their faction out and get them back in afther the battle.. Poor you....but good try.
Omg man are u idiot? We cant transfer it with transfer option so we force to attack it, same with GO fiefs, banned owner not fief and not his stuff. Too bad what u dont got profit from ban Tosdhar owner, but dont be so mad about that.(click to show/hide)
Omg man are u idiot? We can transfer it with transfer option so we force to attack it, same with GO fiefs, banned owner not fief and not his stuff. Too bad what u dont got profit from ban Tosdhar owner, but dont be so mad about that.ofcoursde i am mad.
Omg man are u idiot? We cant transfer it with transfer option so we force to attack it, same with GO fiefs, banned owner not fief and not his stuff. Too bad what u dont got profit from ban Tosdhar owner, but dont be so mad about that.Yeah because your CHEATING in system makes that stuff YOURS dos it NOT ? yeah you worked so hard for those multi accounting stuff right.
P.S. Cheers to ur wifes good block :P
The question is how did you manage to save troops inside fiefs.
flagcap vs noshow
Omg man are u idiot? We cant transfer it with transfer option so we force to attack it, same with GO fiefs, banned owner not fief and not his stuff. Too bad what u dont got profit from ban Tosdhar owner, but dont be so mad about that.
You can't transfer it because the owner has been found guilty to cheating. Then you keep all the ill gained troops, equipment and gold. How is that not cheating?
Not guilty yet, mearly accused at the moment.
Ginger stop posting and talk to me about that look I'm back from emergency last night and I'm busy with that shit.Fuck it Noc, im out of strat.
Don't stress me out :P
Fuck it Noc, im out of strat.
Selling Dhirim and play cRPG, atleast there we can have a fair game.
so erm can someone explain what actually happend?Certain UIF members got accused of cheating and were banned prematurely to get things straight and make them explain the situation. Banned characters were booted from strat and fiefs owned by banned characters lost their owners so UIF factions had to attack their own fiefs to regain the ownership untill everything settles. Normally if you capture the fief, it loses all the troops and needs time to regain those but UIF is good at strat and they found out a way to get the things done without wasting a ticket from fief side, Shik already explained how.
flagcap vs noshowWell in my battle there was some defenders
Certain UIF members got accused of cheating and were banned prematurely to get things straight and make them explain the situation.Saying ppl where banned prematurely is an understatement, actually devs did check what was going on with these accounts and thought them to be valid enough to hand out bans, its now up to the banned to explain themselves to the devs.
Saying ppl where banned prematurely is an understatement, actually devs did check what was going on with these accounts and thought them to be valid enough to hand out bans, its now up to the banned to explain themselves to the devs.Oh sorry for that misunderstanding i've never tried to say that they were banned because someone pointed fingers at them ofcourse you are right, what i tried to say that not all of those who got banned are guilty, some may appear to be an actual relatives or friends playing from one household and although i think that the percentage of not guilty players is low, we are yet to find out if there is any and who they are, calling player a cheater just because he got caught in this banwave is wrong.
You may ofc have your opinion and what other ppl might say, but the devs dont just ban for fun.
And no one can just tell them to ban without a traceable reason.
I believe that the frustration comes from the belief that banning the players who have multiaccounted is not enough.I need to hire you to do my posts :D nice written
By which I mean this, the factions that most of this thread talks about are perceived to have abused the multiaccount system on a clan-wide scale, meaning that it was not the actions of one or two players, but that the leadership knew and approved of, even planned, these practices.
This leads to the line of thinking that while banning accounts is of course a good thing, it also does not solve anything as the players banned have already shown that they are more than happy to simply get another one.
So the players banned will come back with new accounts, everything on strategus has been salvaged by their clans, which means that despite their cheating and being caught, they have in fact, lost nothing.
About the fiefs, its only against the rules if a attacking enemy army is closing in and an ally or the same clan then attacks its own fief in order to obstruct the enemy attacker and delay for a day or more, thats also what some clans have done in the past and gotten punished for.
If this doesn't apply then it's ofc no problem to make a transfer battle, we all have done it.
Certain UIF members got accused of cheating and were banned prematurely to get things straight and make them explain the situation.
It would be better if all transfers were done with the transfer fief function, regardless of whether the fief is gonna be attacked or not.but then explain how the Nords knew about the banns so early that they attacked before we knew all the names on those banned ?
In this case, however, that wasn't possible (since the fief owner is banned), so reclaiming the village by attacking it is perfectly legitimate. Furthermore, there was no enemy army nearby and "it was coming" (when?) is not a valid excuse.
Before somebody starts screaming "omg biased Nord admin", this is chadz' opinion as well.
I know you already specified in a later post that you meant something else, but I would like to state it officially anyway: players got banned solely based on anonymised (no player names) game logs. We have received reports of cheaters in the past, but they were made without a shred of proof and/or by biased sources; those have nothing to do with the recent bans.
but then explain how the Nords knew about the banns so early that they attacked before we knew all the names on those banned ?
It would be better if all transfers were done with the transfer fief function, regardless of whether the fief is gonna be attacked or not.So the Devs meaning is that cheating is okey that banning the account and then the clan receives the equipment gold troops whatever they got ?
In this case, however, that wasn't possible (since the fief owner is banned), so reclaiming the village by attacking it is perfectly legitimate. Furthermore, there was no enemy army nearby and "it was coming" (when?) is not a valid excuse.
Before somebody starts screaming "omg biased Nord admin", this is chadz' opinion as well.
And you did not reply to the fact that 1 grey order and a DRZ even made a bogus faction to attack themselves. So they meant to hide it ??? yes i belive so. And ur rule did not state any circumcises that we had to be on our way to attack that fief and or army.this:
It would be better if all transfers were done with the transfer fief function, regardless of whether the fief is gonna be attacked or not.
In this case, however, that wasn't possible (since the fief owner is banned), so reclaiming the village by attacking it is perfectly legitimate. Furthermore, there was no enemy army nearby and "it was coming" (when?) is not a valid excuse.
I hope your celebrating. i hope your hole clan and all that worked with you guys where banned. but my hopes are only dreams i am afraid.I hope you will get your medicine soon, before you got brain damage :?
Quote from: cmpxchg8b on October 16, 2012, 05:24:15 pm
I would like to remind Astralis, Hospitallers and everyone else that attacking your own/your allies' fiefs in order to prevent them from being attacked by enemies is considered heavy exploiting.
Please cancel the attacks as soon as possible or we will be forced to take action. This is your first and last warning.
riddle me this.. if eny merc alliance members were banned who would find out sooner, their enemys or their allies>?Well, obviously none of their allies would find out about it before they posted about it in the unban thread, right?
May I try myself on helping the whole drama along a little bit by clarifying (for me and maybe for others too) what Ginger is actually argueing about:For the most part right. but as well obvious abusing game mechanics that's is "new" and unknown for the community until this happen.
He is expressing his concern about some players of a certain clan may have had certain and very specific informations about banned players and the fiefs belonging to them before the rest of the community.
Furthermore he is concerned about those informations giving an advantage in planning and executing attacks on those fiefs of banned players.
In my understanding, those kind of informations gave those players of a certain clan an easy "walk in the park" obtaining those fiefs without any actual resistence. Including naturals inside those fiefs which may have been cheated for...
He would like to read a statement of responsible officials in good faith that those concerns of his are unbased and everything went according to rules and common sense to achieve an enjoyable and fair-play Strategus experience.
Ginger, please feel free to correct any mistakes I may have made.
Apart from "Strategus Issues", can we also have "Mental health issues" board?Some might think that, but not people that speak to me one to one. My how can i put this. my way of expresion thru english is a lot worse then my native language. And i understand that some sentences i write is not the best English. But with good will you understand that a forum might get u to look a bitch or whiner or arrogant or however. The thing is RL is very much different.