Grey Order Strat Announcement

[chadz]

No matter how long a post is, a GTX is still a GTX.

Let's talk facts:
For those that don't know, the banning for multiaccounting was done anonymously. Those who dealt with the bans had nothing but numbers, no names. They didn't know who was behind the number, they didn't know what faction that number belonged to. They could have easily banned themselves. Therefore there was no bias in banning multi accounters
Now here is where I want to turn your biased-dev argument around: If what I say is true, and a high proportion of the bans dealt hit your clan - what does that tell you?

Yes, the failed battle shit was horrible, for all of us. This was intended to be the most bug-free version of strat, and then this shit happened. I even considered restarting the round due to this, because it really has changed the strength of factions and was quite blatantly unfair. I honestly want to apologize for this. I think I have managed to fix it now, though.

However, what you are doing here is trying to lobby for allowing the usage of multi accounts. You know that leaving strat has a big impact on the game, and by doing so you try and force me into not doing multi bans any more.

And this is a really shitty move, sorry.

[Erasmas]

chadz, I am sorry to say I do not agree.

Noone is objecting against bans that were casted in fair cases (and equally to all culprits, despite of the clan). However, we know who was banned and who was not banned and how it relates to the accountsharing versus actual dmage made to the clan. And that leads us to the simple conclusion - this process was made in the selective and superficious way.  Having knowledge about tools that are used -  by many guys as far as we know it - and having knowledge about stratviewer, distributed in limited circle, allegedly with your approval, well, I personally dare to call it biased attitude.

How we see it - some rules can be broken without punishment, and some not. Some guys can do it and some not. That is the bigest issue here.

Do we lobby for usage of multiaccounts? No. We do lobby, however, for clear set of rules, and in-game mechanizm that allows to manage other clanmates accounts in sensible, limited and organized manner.

And no, it is not a GTX. We are not raging, and I personally am sorry, cause this game is fun after all.

[chadz]

However, we know who was banned and who was not banned and how it relates to the accountsharing versus actual dmage made to the clan.
Not everyone was banned because sometimes evidence wasn't enough. Not banning someone was done the same way as banning someone - no names were known, so it wasn't biased "unban" either.

And that leads us to the simple conclusion - this process was made in the selective and superficious way. 
So you are saying I am lying, banning was done by selecting the player first and then trying to find evidence to support it, and not the other way around.

Having knowledge about tools that are used -  by many guys as far as we know it - and having knowledge about stratviewer, distributed in limited circle, allegedly with your approval, well, I personally dare to call it biased attitude. How we see it - some rules can be broken without punishment, and some not. Some guys can do it and some not. That is the bigest issue here.
In my opinion, tools are allowed. In general, everything that's not disallowed is allowed. Multiaccounting was clearly and multiple times disallowed, tools are ok in my book

We do lobby, however, for clear set of rules, and in-game mechanizm that allows to manage other clanmates accounts in sensible, limited and organized manner.
agree with that

[Latvian]

without UIF EU side of map will be too big

[Thovex]

See you, Grey Order.

[Wiltzu]

I - this thread for various reasons. I like that you're in the strat, you create a lot of and large battles/sieges. This is a shitty and shameful move GO, you pussies. And there was a green light for this Strategus Viewer from the devs. Why do you think you weren't invited to this where as nords were? Well look into your past and figure it out.

I had fun playing on your side and against you. Cya around GO.





What comes to the Strategus Viewer, I'm on the edge. In a way it's cheating, but then again you only see what your OWN faction sees.

[Zaharist]

Hope to see you next rounds, guys.
Was pleasure to play with you since strat1!

[Erasmas]

However, we know who was banned and who was not banned and how it relates to the accountsharing versus actual dmage made to the clan.
Not everyone was banned because sometimes evidence wasn't enough. Not banning someone was done the same way as banning someone - no names were known, so it wasn't biased "unban" either.

It is really hard to believe in. Let me put that straight.  More often accessed accounts remained intact, while the accounts accessed in singular cases were banned. The method was exactly the same. If the selection method was equal, how is that possible? And - by pure coincidence - the bans were given to the guys holdng valuable Strat stuff. I set aside the fact that some other guys from other clans, who accessed others accounts were not banned at all. Maybe that has something to do with the tools they were using.

And that leads us to the simple conclusion - this process was made in the selective and superficious way.
So you are saying I am lying, banning was done by selecting the player first and then trying to find evidence to support it, and not the other way around.

That is is exectly how we think it was done. We have no idea by whom (although there are some rumours) and I am quite sure it was not personally you ...

Having knowledge about tools that are used -  by many guys as far as we know it - and having knowledge about stratviewer, distributed in limited circle, allegedly with your approval, well, I personally dare to call it biased attitude. How we see it - some rules can be broken without punishment, and some not. Some guys can do it and some not. That is the bigest issue here.
In my opinion, tools are allowed. In general, everything that's not disallowed is allowed. Multiaccounting was clearly and multiple times disallowed, tools are ok in my book

Does this refer to the usage of tools as Teamviewer as well? I can't really believe that. To set aside the fact that such tools as Stratviewer, that greatly influence the game balance are not known to the public, while being used by some other users, is simply, that is, well, forgive my language, "not fair". And seeing post of Witzu above  provokes the question - so who was to be in invited in this magic circle , and who was to decide on that?

We do lobby, however, for clear set of rules, and in-game mechanizm that allows to manage other clanmates accounts in sensible, limited and organized manner.
agree with that

Thank you, +1 to you for that

On another issue - we really appreciate what you said about fucked up battles.

[Tears of Destiny]

Who is this "credible" inside source mentioned in the opening post? Please don't tell me it was someone taking Shik's irc rants about selective banning seriously.

[Mike_of_Kingswell]

I am really not sure if i should +1 the opening post because GO is leaveing and I like it because I think they got what they had comming.
Or if I should -1 it because even if it is a really well done post it doesnt change the fact that it sounds like buthurt multiaccount lobbying...

I respect a lot of players for saying GO will be missed and stuff...but personally I won't miss them one bit...

It is really hard to believe in. Let me put that straight.  More often accessed accounts remained intact, while the accounts accessed in singular cases were banned.

Not only do you call chadz a liar but you also admit to haveing done even more multiaccounting?
How does that make your argument better in any way?!

No matter how long a post is, a GTX is still a GTX.

+1 This.
Btw anyone  by any chance still has a link to the thread in which of a certain Gery Order member was banned for haveing over 100 accounts on his IP? Can't find it anymore but think it would be great in this thread to prove how bad the poor GO was treated in the past ;)

[Lt_Anders]

Btw anyone  by any chance still has a link to the thread in which of a certain Gery Order member was banned for haveing over 100 accounts on his IP? Can't find it anymore but think it would be great in this thread to prove how bad the poor GO was treated in the past ;)

Was harpag, I'm sure.... I think the link...got removed. Was a pretty long time ago.

[chadz]

I haven't heard of people using TeamViewer. This seems to be just another way to multi account / accountsharing , and is therefore considered just the same, as a heads up.

It is really hard to believe in. Let me put that straight.  More often accessed accounts remained intact, while the accounts accessed in singular cases were banned. The method was exactly the same. If the selection method was equal, how is that possible? And - by pure coincidence - the bans were given to the guys holdng valuable Strat stuff. I set aside the fact that some other guys from other clans, who accessed others accounts were not banned at all. Maybe that has something to do with the tools they were using.

I won't go into detail here, but there was more information used than just connections. I would assume that a player with a lot of strat stuff was checked more frequently, maybe by more IPs/different players. There was definately no knowledge of the items on the players.
The IP is secondary, the question was: Is multiaccount done here to get an advantage?

[Noctivagant]

I like reading Harpag's posts while listening this

We'll cya

[Rikthor]

Burn in hell Grey cheaters.

We never cheated and i even posted proof so use this "tool" story to quit strat, i am only happy to see your polish ass out of cRPG.

Hahahahahaha

Go outside and relax weirdo, stop getting upset in mods of bad video games.

[chadz]

Also, if that was not clear: It's really sad to see GO leave, you do have my respect for running a clan that big so efficiently, I just think you sometimes cross the border to immorality, and that too far and too often.

I would prefer it if you'd stay.