The kicking of attackers at Maras Castle

[Abay]

The funny thing is people still talking the issue while the truth is certain. Stop being professional like this. Do your clans pay money to you for this?

So, accept that kicking them was not wrong...

Edit: The best is.... After timer reach ZERO, defenders win automatically and the server kicks everyone out.

[Royans]

If Attackers camp, the defenders automatically win, right, due to the timer running out? Or are we talking about when the timer has already ran out and it is "after the fact" for defender clean-up of remaining attackers?


Note that I was not there, I'm just trying to figure out what happened.

Remaining attackers

[Korgoth]

If Attackers camp, the defenders automatically win, right, due to the timer running out? Or are we talking about when the timer has already ran out and it is "after the fact" for defender clean-up of remaining attackers?


Note that I was not there, I'm just trying to figure out what happened.

If the timer runs out it says the attackers retreat. Which then the defenders have to kill the remaining attackers (Which could be the whole team), which constantly happens is they bunker up in a tower.

[Teeth]

If Attackers camp, the defenders automatically win, right, due to the timer running out?


Note that I was not there, I'm just trying to figure out what happened.

I'd wish that was the case. As clearly as I can put it, the attackers retreated and held outside, while having no ladders remaining. The defenders did not come out to kill them, but instead kicked the entire attacking team.

Which is a fair course of action, if it weren't for the dozen similar situations where the same clans that were now defending camped as attackers after retreating and made the defenders lose considerable amount of tickets by waiting for them to come kill them. Of course way after the timer had run out and without a single admin even opening his mouth, even though they were surely present. Please note that Grey and DRZ do not have admins.

So once more:
The problem was not the kicking in itself, but the fact that this kicking never occured when similar situations occured the other way around

[Abay]

I'd wish that was the case. As clearly as I can put it, the attackers retreated and held outside, while having no ladders remaining. The defenders did not come out to kill them, but instead kicked the entire attacking team.

Which is a fair course of action, if it weren't for the dozen similar situations where the same clans that were now defending camped as attackers after retreating and made the defenders lose considerable amount of tickets by waiting for them to come kill them. Of course way after the timer had run out and without a single admin even opening his mouth, even though they were surely present. Please note that Grey and DRZ do not have admins.

So once more:
The problem was not the kicking in itself, but the fact that this kicking never occured when similar situations occured the other way around

What if they dont come out and 100 players decide to wait forever there then die in 3 dayz in front of their computer screen cos of lack of sleep, water and food 

[Crob28]

I'd wish that was the case. As clearly as I can put it, the attackers retreated and held outside, while having no ladders remaining. The defenders did not come out to kill them, but instead kicked the entire attacking team.

Which is a fair course of action, if it weren't for the dozen similar situations where the same clans that were now defending camped as attackers after retreating and made the defenders lose considerable amount of tickets by waiting for them to come kill them. Of course way after the timer had run out and without a single admin even opening his mouth, even though they were surely present. Please note that Grey and DRZ do not have admins.

Could have sworn I saw an attacker or two constantly getting ladders from the weapon rack and dropping them unused on the ground, had quite a big pile in the end

[cmp]

Sadly you don't know shit about the usual course of action of these same admins when they are on the attacking side. I fully agree with this point, but just because one clan has admins should not mean that they get to camp as attackers while the other clan does not.

I think we can all agree that having to go kill the attackers as defenders is stupid, the issue here is that the same thing resulted in camping till the defenders killed them for one side, while it resulted in the kicking of all the attackers for the other side.

Then we should be talking about the other cases, not this one.

[Erzengel]

I'd wish that was the case. As clearly as I can put it, the attackers retreated and held outside, while having no ladders remaining. The defenders did not come out to kill them, but instead kicked the entire attacking team.

Which is a fair course of action, if it weren't for the dozen similar situations where the same clans that were now defending camped as attackers after retreating and made the defenders lose considerable amount of tickets by waiting for them to come kill them. Of course way after the timer had run out and without a single admin even opening his mouth, even though they were surely present. Please note that Grey and DRZ do not have admins.

So once more:
The problem was not the kicking in itself, but the fact that this kicking never occured when similar situations occured the other way around

So you accuse certain admins (including me) of being biased for things that happened (atleast according to you) in the past? This was probably my 5th strategus siege, so I am pretty sure that I haven't been around when this happened before. A lot of people in our team told us that "your" () admins also did this btw. Note that this was a special situation which is quite unlikely normally. We would have charged out of our castle if there were gates (even if when we didn't had to).

Probably there is a good reason why the Greys and DRZ don't have an admin yet, especially not in strategus (I don't have anything against those clans, just saying). Nords and Byzantium have enough admins afaik (who are all doing a great job like the rest), so seriously what is your point?

[Rhekimos]

Yeah the amount of castles that I've defended where the Coalition or Templars have retreated and bunkered up in the one tower that they managed to take. We had to just deal with it and get everyone together to kill the remaining guys.

The rules should apply to everyone, but ofcourse bias admins are just going to stay bias.

There is a bit of a difference in staying inside the enemy castle and in your own spawn. But don't let me ruin a complaint about bias.

Indeed, when you are inside the enemy's castle you at least have the opportunity to attack, while we hadn't. Yet I remember clearly losing about a 100 tickets when trying to clear out a tower as defenders in Uxhal, while the timer was down to -4 minutes. The same principle applies, attackers should attack, defenders should defend.

Attackers should leave the server if they can no longer attack.

If however I am inside your castle, raping your women, you probably have an incentive to stop it.
If you boys are having your own fun outside our castle, I don't care about that.

[Zlisch_The_Butcher]

There is a bit of a difference in staying inside the enemy castle and in your own spawn. But don't let me ruin a complaint about bias.

Indeed, when you are inside the enemy's castle you at least have the opportunity to attack, while we hadn't. Yet I remember clearly losing about a 100 tickets when trying to clear out a tower as defenders in Uxhal, while the timer was down to -4 minutes. The same principle applies, attackers should attack, defenders should defend.


Attackers should leave the server if they can no longer attack.

If however I am inside your castle, raping your women, you probably have an incentive to stop it.
If you boys are having your own fun outside our castle, I don't care about that.

If you're sitting in a tower and not planning on ever attacking you're delaying. Same way as if they're sitting outside the walls. The only difference is that they couldn't possibly attack, and were unwilling to do so, while you were unwilling to attack, but not unable to do so, and you can't even prove that difference existed, as it isn't impossible that one of them had a ladder and just didn't feel like showing it because he wanted to chill out in a tower/outside the walls instead of attacking.

Churchill 1+ing a post like his with that broken logic clearly proves you're biased.

[Teeth]

Then we should be talking about the other cases, not this one.

Technically we are. Seems clear to me that a a siege should end if the timer has run down, regardless of how much attackers are alive. I think retreating should result in the automatic end of the battle to solve all these problems. The mechanics are flawed, tt is up to the devs to change them. In the case that you don't or can't, how about we make it an official rule that when the timer has run down or when the attackers have retreated, they should leave the server?

Official rules should provide clarity for future cases, cause it is clear to me that admins that are present do not have the required objectivity.

So you accuse certain admins (including me) of being biased for things that happened (atleast according to you) in the past? This was probably my 5th strategus siege, so I am pretty sure that I haven't been around when this happened before. A lot of people in our team told us that "your" () admins also did this btw. Note that this was a special situation which is quite unlikely normally. We would have charged out of our castle if there were gates (even if when we didn't had to).

Probably there is a good reason why the Greys and DRZ don't have an admin yet, especially not in strategus (I don't have anything against those clans, just saying). Nords and Byzantium have enough admins afaik (who are all doing a great job like the rest), so seriously what is your point?

Yes, there are obvious double standards here and I think all the present admins were being biased towards the clans they belong to. This was not that special a situation, you could have killed us, with bad losses, but assaulting a tower filled with great mauls yields exactly the same results. I have seen such a situation unfold multiple times and there were either no admins present on our side or they didn't know how to deal with it (there are just 2 Byzantium admins, can't recall that much Nords). I have never seen the attackers being kicked at the end before.

If however I am inside your castle, raping your women, you probably have an incentive to stop it.
If you boys are having your own fun outside our castle, I don't care about that.

If a small band of enemies is locking you down in a castle while you have an army inside it, you probably have an incentive to clear them out. If you have to resort to this reasoning to justify not attacking and delaying as an attacker I just don't know what to say anymore.

[Rhekimos]

If you're sitting in a tower and not planning on ever attacking you're delaying. Same way as if they're sitting outside the walls. The only difference is that they couldn't possibly attack, and were unwilling to do so, while you were willing to attack, but not unable to do so, and you can't even prove that difference existed, as it isn't impossible that one of them had a ladder and just didn't feel like showing it because he wanted to chill out in a tower/outside the walls instead of attacking.

Churchill 1+ing a post like his with that broken logic clearly proves you're biased.

No, they are not the same. You might as well complain about bias in banning teamkillers but not those who kill enemies.
They are all just players after all.

[Zlisch_The_Butcher]

No, they are not the same. You might as well complain about bias in banning teamkillers but not those who kill enemies.
They are all just players after all.

They are the same, both guys aren't willing to attack, and are attackers. You cannot prove one of them wasn't holding a ladder, and as long as that can't be proven they're exactly the same scenario.

[Smoothrich]

Official rules should provide clarity for future cases, cause it is clear to me that admins that are present do not have the required objectivity.

They are clear.  Camping as attackers after time ran out is delaying and thus kickable.  It doesn't stop tons of drama and accusations of bias either way though.

[Abay]

If you're sitting in a tower and not planning on ever attacking you're delaying. Same way as if they're sitting outside the walls. The only difference is that they couldn't possibly attack, and were unwilling to do so, while you were unwilling to attack, but not unable to do so, and you can't even prove that difference existed, as it isn't impossible that one of them had a ladder and just didn't feel like showing it because he wanted to chill out in a tower/outside the walls instead of attacking.

Churchill 1+ing a post like his with that broken logic clearly proves you're biased.

So attackers can decide to not bring ladders cos defenders have to come out? 
People are really funny