Forum: empire-en
Board: [817] War Updates
Topic: [346353] GB1 Server War
[4912113]
Friedrich IV (US1) [None]
:: Feb. 13, 2018, 10:52 p.m.
I'll look into it.The Torrent (GB1) said:
Looking at it here, I have a signature image, created for me by GGS. That is undisputably allowed because it was made by a GGS CM.
I have less than 10 or 6 lines of text. I'm not sure on the font size, I would have to check.
[4912115]
Friedrich IV (US1) [None]
:: Feb. 13, 2018, 10:54 p.m.
And you're clearly trying to nitpick out of butthurtness.The Torrent (GB1) said:You post the guidelines but you’ve clearly not read them, judging by your signature breaking them.BM_Friedrich said:https://community.goodgamestudios.com/empire/en/discussion/112432/community-guidelines#latestKarem GK (GB1) said:
i believe you have removed mine cause its related to Ang . is it a rule that moderators put from their own or GGS already put it , if so point me to Forum rules please i would be pleased to check .
Here's the guidelines for you.
I've removed hundreds of screenshots, about many different people. I left the very obvious photoshop jobs up because it was pretty clear no one was bothered by them, until you just now. Making the claim I only remove screenshots because they're related to Ang is completely counter-productive.
From what I have seen, its fine. Point something out to me that I've missed and I'll gladly edit it.
[4912117]
Manatee (US1) [None]
:: Feb. 13, 2018, 10:54 p.m.
Maybe he's referring to the 'advertising' part (your gaming channel).
Still, there are always people who try to bust your balls for something. The fact remains Karem posted a private PM and you properly removed it. Twice.
Still, there are always people who try to bust your balls for something. The fact remains Karem posted a private PM and you properly removed it. Twice.
[4912120]
Friedrich IV (US1) [None]
:: Feb. 13, 2018, 10:55 p.m.
Never mind I misread, you are correct. I will edit my signature.The Torrent (GB1) said:If you have a image, it’s 3 lines of text max underneath you have 4.BM_Friedrich said:I'll look into it.The Torrent (GB1) said:
Looking at it here, I have a signature image, created for me by GGS. That is undisputably allowed because it was made by a GGS CM.
I have less than 10 or 6 lines of text. I'm not sure on the font size, I would have to check.
[4912124]
Friedrich IV (US1) [None]
:: Feb. 13, 2018, 10:59 p.m.
It says that in the paragraph, and then goes on to say these are the rules: where it doesn't mention that, and explicitly allows links.Manatee (US1) said:Maybe he's referring to the 'advertising' part (your gaming channel).
Still, there are always people who try to bust your balls for something. The fact remains Karem posted a private PM and you properly removed it. Twice.
It's the only part of the Guidelines that has specific parameters in it, so we abide by the strict bullet points below.
[4912126]
Defectus (US1) [US1]
:: Feb. 13, 2018, 11 p.m.
Good job locating a useless technicality that you can now use to prove your conspiracy that mods are only removing PM's that they disagree with.The Torrent (GB1) said:You post the guidelines but you’ve clearly not read them, judging by your signature breaking them.BM_Friedrich said:https://community.goodgamestudios.com/empire/en/discussion/112432/community-guidelines#latestKarem GK (GB1) said:
i believe you have removed mine cause its related to Ang . is it a rule that moderators put from their own or GGS already put it , if so point me to Forum rules please i would be pleased to check .
Here's the guidelines for you.
I've removed hundreds of screenshots, about many different people. I left the very obvious photoshop jobs up because it was pretty clear no one was bothered by them, until you just now. Making the claim I only remove screenshots because they're related to Ang is completely counter-productive.
Did aliens build the pyramids, too?
[4912127]
Friedrich IV (US1) [None]
:: Feb. 13, 2018, 11 p.m.
I misread it, I apologize. It does explicitly say max of 3 lines *below the signature*The Torrent (GB1) said:Wait really? Ohh I never knew.BM_Friedrich said:You do realize that's for the image itself right?The Torrent (GB1) said:If you have a image, it’s 3 lines of text max underneath you have 4.BM_Friedrich said:I'll look into it.The Torrent (GB1) said:
Looking at it here, I have a signature image, created for me by GGS. That is undisputably allowed because it was made by a GGS CM.
I have less than 10 or 6 lines of text. I'm not sure on the font size, I would have to check.
it has 3 - my name, my LL info under it, and Moderator.
The text is separate, as outlined beneath where it says graphical signature.
thats great, well im off to change my signature!
I will edit mine now.
[4912128]
Spirit Bear (AU1) [None]
:: Feb. 13, 2018, 11 p.m.
wanna hit u so bad rnThe Torrent (GB1) said:Wait really? Ohh I never knew.BM_Friedrich said:You do realize that's for the image itself right?The Torrent (GB1) said:If you have a image, it’s 3 lines of text max underneath you have 4.BM_Friedrich said:I'll look into it.The Torrent (GB1) said:
Looking at it here, I have a signature image, created for me by GGS. That is undisputably allowed because it was made by a GGS CM.
I have less than 10 or 6 lines of text. I'm not sure on the font size, I would have to check.
it has 3 - my name, my LL info under it, and Moderator.
The text is separate, as outlined beneath where it says graphical signature.
thats great, well im off to change my signature!
[4912132]
Friedrich IV (US1) [None]
:: Feb. 13, 2018, 11:05 p.m.
You guys see what happens when we start to nitpick? We all have to go back and read it line by line and take everything literally.
Technically speaking, all of the guidelines *except* the signature ones are very vaguely written, with a few things mixed in. We try to be lenient with most things, but when people start to get mad something was taken down, and they look around and say "well this person this one time didn't have it taken down!", suddenly the entire forum gets stricter rules. I'm not taking shots at anyone, that is just what happens.
EDIT: There has been discussion of re-writing them and making them a lot more specific so things like this don't continue to happen. I have never seen someone's argument get their post back, I have only seen it have other ones be taken down. I don't speak for the other mods, but these conversations always end up as "well they shouldn't be able to do it either" and not "here's why I should be able to do it".
If we took the absolute strictest interpretation of each and every rule, none of these war threads would last past the first page.
.....well crap, I'm selling myself on using a very strict interpretation now, lol
Technically speaking, all of the guidelines *except* the signature ones are very vaguely written, with a few things mixed in. We try to be lenient with most things, but when people start to get mad something was taken down, and they look around and say "well this person this one time didn't have it taken down!", suddenly the entire forum gets stricter rules. I'm not taking shots at anyone, that is just what happens.
EDIT: There has been discussion of re-writing them and making them a lot more specific so things like this don't continue to happen. I have never seen someone's argument get their post back, I have only seen it have other ones be taken down. I don't speak for the other mods, but these conversations always end up as "well they shouldn't be able to do it either" and not "here's why I should be able to do it".
If we took the absolute strictest interpretation of each and every rule, none of these war threads would last past the first page.
.....well crap, I'm selling myself on using a very strict interpretation now, lol
[4912134]
Nick002 (AU1) [None]
:: Feb. 13, 2018, 11:06 p.m.
Hey, theres a server war going on, did you guys hear about it??
[4912137]
Friedrich IV (US1) [None]
:: Feb. 13, 2018, 11:09 p.m.
Yep there's a lot from almost everyone here. Would you guys rather see me delete this thread and ban you all? I really don't think so, and I'd much rather not have to do that.Karem GK (GB1) said:@BM_Friedrich
You really need to read the Guidelines again maybe lol
The whole thread is full of insults
There's a point to the lenient interpretation most of us take, we want to allow people to have these conversations on the forums, to talk about their reasons for warring another alliance etc.
[4912138]
Defectus (US1) [US1]
:: Feb. 13, 2018, 11:10 p.m.
You've never heard the conspiracy theory that aliens built the pyramids?Karem GK (GB1) said:Mate i am Egyptian , what aliensTheBlueIcicle (US1) said:Good job locating a useless technicality that you can now use to prove your conspiracy that mods are only removing PM's that they disagree with.The Torrent (GB1) said:You post the guidelines but you’ve clearly not read them, judging by your signature breaking them.BM_Friedrich said:https://community.goodgamestudios.com/empire/en/discussion/112432/community-guidelines#latestKarem GK (GB1) said:
i believe you have removed mine cause its related to Ang . is it a rule that moderators put from their own or GGS already put it , if so point me to Forum rules please i would be pleased to check .
Here's the guidelines for you.
I've removed hundreds of screenshots, about many different people. I left the very obvious photoshop jobs up because it was pretty clear no one was bothered by them, until you just now. Making the claim I only remove screenshots because they're related to Ang is completely counter-productive.
Did aliens build the pyramids, too?
My point was that his claim that Friedrich is trying to manipulate messages one way or another is ridiculous.
[4912139]
Friedrich IV (US1) [None]
:: Feb. 13, 2018, 11:14 p.m.
You guys both missed a great opportunity to use the Ancient Aliens meme. Just saying.
I have nothing to do with whatever war's going on, I could care less if people are PO'd at Ang, and I have a very large disapproval for a lot of the things that go on during wars and wish that support also did. I don't feel I have any reason to try and push things one way or another, and I don't.
I appreciate that.TheBlueIcicle (US1) said:You've never heard the conspiracy theory that aliens built the pyramids?Karem GK (GB1) said:Mate i am Egyptian , what aliensTheBlueIcicle (US1) said:Good job locating a useless technicality that you can now use to prove your conspiracy that mods are only removing PM's that they disagree with.The Torrent (GB1) said:You post the guidelines but you’ve clearly not read them, judging by your signature breaking them.BM_Friedrich said:https://community.goodgamestudios.com/empire/en/discussion/112432/community-guidelines#latestKarem GK (GB1) said:
i believe you have removed mine cause its related to Ang . is it a rule that moderators put from their own or GGS already put it , if so point me to Forum rules please i would be pleased to check .
Here's the guidelines for you.
I've removed hundreds of screenshots, about many different people. I left the very obvious photoshop jobs up because it was pretty clear no one was bothered by them, until you just now. Making the claim I only remove screenshots because they're related to Ang is completely counter-productive.
Did aliens build the pyramids, too?
My point was that his claim that Friedrich is trying to manipulate messages one way or another is ridiculous.
I have nothing to do with whatever war's going on, I could care less if people are PO'd at Ang, and I have a very large disapproval for a lot of the things that go on during wars and wish that support also did. I don't feel I have any reason to try and push things one way or another, and I don't.
[4912141]
Friedrich IV (US1) [None]
:: Feb. 13, 2018, 11:16 p.m.
TL;DR if you have legitimate grievances about my neutrality in a war I have nothing to do with, report your complaint to support or take it up with me in private messages. I'm usually more than willing to discuss actions taken, and as stated and done above, remove things others may have done that I either miss or had previously deemed no threat to anyone and not worth removing.
This thread is starting to smell like a burning dumpster. What say we get things back on topic of the war now?
This thread is starting to smell like a burning dumpster. What say we get things back on topic of the war now?
[4912144]
cheza2000 (GB1) [GB1]
:: Feb. 13, 2018, 11:36 p.m.
This is ridiculous. Bad enough the extent to which Ang is accused of manipulating his position, Friedrich is doing a voluntary role and is doing it without bias. A little common sense is required people. There are genuine issues then there are manufactured ones, people can see the difference and you actually hurt any cause you may have. This thread, as I have said before is often very lacking in fact.
[4912147]
Friedrich IV (US1) [None]
:: Feb. 13, 2018, 11:40 p.m.
Thats some nice kills and some nice honorKarem GK (GB1) said:I am not part of the war now but there is a report missing here which is probably the best lol
Yes SE are not part of the war anymore but that one should not get lost in the mess !!
why the best ? Full wolves hitlol
[4912148]
Charon (GB1) [GB1]
:: Feb. 13, 2018, 11:45 p.m.
Better log back in and do a head count then!Pretty ironic when your side has 6x the dove players last time I checked, and I was in Spain so I activated + dispute with GGS means I might not be able to login until they resolve an issue...
Have a great week GIF man.
[4912151]
UltimateJhon (GB1) [None]
:: Feb. 14, 2018, 12:22 a.m.
There’s been 30K+ kill hits by CG on Praets with Sam troops etc, 9k isn’t that greatKarem GK (GB1) said:I am not part of the war now but there is a report missing here which is probably the best lol
Yes SE are not part of the war anymore but that one should not get lost in the mess !!
why the best ? Full wolves hit
[4912158]
Spirit Bear (AU1) [None]
:: Feb. 14, 2018, 1 a.m.
it was on sir wankalot so wasn't badUltimateJhon (GB1) said:There’s been 30K+ kill hits by CG on Praets with Sam troops etc, 9k isn’t that greatKarem GK (GB1) said:I am not part of the war now but there is a report missing here which is probably the best lol
Yes SE are not part of the war anymore but that one should not get lost in the mess !!
why the best ? Full wolves hit
[4912161]
Batten (GB1) [GB1]
:: Feb. 14, 2018, 1:34 a.m.
I personally think BM Friedrich has done a good job with the thread. It isn't easy and appreciate the time he's put into it. We do push the envelope so having someone pull us back into line occasionally isn't a bad thing.
On balance I accept that it was unfair to imply Jonesy was doing breaching a rule in his castle. I cannot fully support that point so accept his assurance that wasn't the case and apologise. What I won't apologise for is encouraging all players on all sides to stick to the terms and conditions and not put themselves or their alliance at risk. I'd rather face the best line up an alliance can field than one missing talented individuals who make avoidable mistakes. I shouldn't have personalised what is a wider more general issue. I remain convinced the whole moving castle thing needs a rework maybe bringing in a new element an advanced camp moire focused on attacking specific target with maybe a sally forth bonus or option for defenders that might be more fun. Moving a whole castle I understand for situations where someone is being given a tough time and can't grow. Moving castle in a war for advantage seems a misuse of what I understood developers to have intended as a protective measure originally. In theory it should be possible to counter the Bouncy Castle move having seen it in practice it is a lot tougher than I'd imagined.
In terms of COP point Ultra - nice to see you back from the trenches - made. As far as I'm aware the first strike was on Gondor's KT. Ang also said there would be no rules, so technically that put everything on the table. I haven't fought a war with COP's before so all new to me. Talking purely in terms of Odins, the interest in COP's is more linked to the level of troops stored in them. They have had as high a figure as 60,000 plus troops in KT's and I caught attacking troops in a metro which looked a better result than it was. The COP's from an attackers perspective as I see it are useful to lessen castle based support forcing a level of support to be held in them against them being taken allowing attackers to force defence around more easily. The metro's with capture flags are being put up and knocked down put up and knocked down it's more of a dance at the moment so it isn't serious. At least that's my perception.
When you have a slight advantage and are attacking you have to work harder to track defensive troop movements than I remember from a few years ago. Players can take a range of evasive maneuvers
1. Pro mode account
2. Open gate
3. Fire Castellan
4. Defense Hall losses maybe 3 attackers to 1 defender on a good defensive set up with very strong cast
5. Move troops out as attacker arrives
6. Hide troops in pro mode castles
7. Hide troops in RV's
8. Hide troops in COP's
So to deny a defender the comfort of troops being safe in this war attacking players:
1. Hit from close
2. Hit out Rv's
3. Hit COP's to deny safe haven
4. Time hit for when a gate closes or Pro mode runs out
5. Use Fire Starter Comms
6. Repeat hit without pattern so more irregular hits less tempo hits (clockwork every time cooldown finishes)
Essential the war is about who can catch more defence or attack in the open at present at least that is how it feels. The difficulty is this requires a level of volume hitting in my view that does with tools given the quality of defence make it more expensive for resource players and good to see tool cost reductions of up to 70% as that will prevent some players participating at a level they and we might want. Maybe that could be considered in data review by GGE from the conflict.
On balance I accept that it was unfair to imply Jonesy was doing breaching a rule in his castle. I cannot fully support that point so accept his assurance that wasn't the case and apologise. What I won't apologise for is encouraging all players on all sides to stick to the terms and conditions and not put themselves or their alliance at risk. I'd rather face the best line up an alliance can field than one missing talented individuals who make avoidable mistakes. I shouldn't have personalised what is a wider more general issue. I remain convinced the whole moving castle thing needs a rework maybe bringing in a new element an advanced camp moire focused on attacking specific target with maybe a sally forth bonus or option for defenders that might be more fun. Moving a whole castle I understand for situations where someone is being given a tough time and can't grow. Moving castle in a war for advantage seems a misuse of what I understood developers to have intended as a protective measure originally. In theory it should be possible to counter the Bouncy Castle move having seen it in practice it is a lot tougher than I'd imagined.
In terms of COP point Ultra - nice to see you back from the trenches - made. As far as I'm aware the first strike was on Gondor's KT. Ang also said there would be no rules, so technically that put everything on the table. I haven't fought a war with COP's before so all new to me. Talking purely in terms of Odins, the interest in COP's is more linked to the level of troops stored in them. They have had as high a figure as 60,000 plus troops in KT's and I caught attacking troops in a metro which looked a better result than it was. The COP's from an attackers perspective as I see it are useful to lessen castle based support forcing a level of support to be held in them against them being taken allowing attackers to force defence around more easily. The metro's with capture flags are being put up and knocked down put up and knocked down it's more of a dance at the moment so it isn't serious. At least that's my perception.
When you have a slight advantage and are attacking you have to work harder to track defensive troop movements than I remember from a few years ago. Players can take a range of evasive maneuvers
1. Pro mode account
2. Open gate
3. Fire Castellan
4. Defense Hall losses maybe 3 attackers to 1 defender on a good defensive set up with very strong cast
5. Move troops out as attacker arrives
6. Hide troops in pro mode castles
7. Hide troops in RV's
8. Hide troops in COP's
So to deny a defender the comfort of troops being safe in this war attacking players:
1. Hit from close
2. Hit out Rv's
3. Hit COP's to deny safe haven
4. Time hit for when a gate closes or Pro mode runs out
5. Use Fire Starter Comms
6. Repeat hit without pattern so more irregular hits less tempo hits (clockwork every time cooldown finishes)
Essential the war is about who can catch more defence or attack in the open at present at least that is how it feels. The difficulty is this requires a level of volume hitting in my view that does with tools given the quality of defence make it more expensive for resource players and good to see tool cost reductions of up to 70% as that will prevent some players participating at a level they and we might want. Maybe that could be considered in data review by GGE from the conflict.