Quote:
It was against the spirit of the game, but merely to reverse the previous flaw. I shouldn't have been locked down because my computer was not as quick on the 7th race. You can win 6 races and have just an OP to show for it, lose 1 race and your whole army dies. Is that fair? No. So I fixed it.
What we did was not against the spirit of the game in any way. The spirit of the game is to use strategy as much as you can. If we had equal amount of squads as you, we wouldnt have done it. But outnumbered we had to get a bit innovative and there is nothing wrong with thinking up something out of the box. This is what we did, and it perfectly stays in the spirit of the game. What you did was use a known loophole. What we did was uncover a loophole that even we didn't know was one. It makes us that much more innocent.
Quote:
The slave colonies made it abuse.
Like I said before, nothing in the ToS, or any other rule or opinion so far stated in BD, has ever stated that these colonies were slave colonies. They were valid colonies and it was a valid tactic.
Quote:
They did not do it of their own accord. You told them to place at x coordinates, and build x structures to be ready for x plan. It was not against BD rules, as far as the tactic goes, but using the colonies in the way that you did were indeed against the rules as specified by the creator of the game.
The creator of the game did not specify anything against this particular tactic. It was a loophole that came to light after we did it. And the colonies would not have done what they did without being willing to do it. Unless they were multies, but its clear they were not.
Quote:
They weren't players quitting though, they were slaves who had served their purpose. Hence the difference. Writing it in a paragraph 10 times as long doesn't change simple facts.
It still doesnt make any difference. How long a colony should stay in an alliance is not listed anywhere. Heck a colony can stay just 1 tick, leave and give crystals. That is NOT against the rules anywhere. Calling them slave colonies repeatedly does not make them one.
Quote:
He built to be a gate, he joined and was booted. After serving his purpose he was conquered. Classic slave abuse. Get a clue.
Slave colonies are used for the purposes of resources or spamming. According to the rules. We used him as a member, and he performed a members function. I.e let us use his gates. Get it right.
Quote:
The fact that it abused the speed and freedom of a "new colony" is what made it slave abuse. So indeed it was a violation as indicated by the creator of the game.
It still does not make it slave abuse. He joined as soon as he dropped protection. That is not against the rules by any means. Neither the creator of the game, nor the admins or the developers have defined such a colony as a slave ever.
Quote:
Slave colonies have been addressed dozens of times before this, and it's something severe as it drastically changed the flow of the game, while mine did not.
Ive said this numerous times. Single purpose colonies used for the sake of other things than resources are not slaves. They are legitimate members that did their job.
Quote:
The OPs were upgraded by them into silos, which your team then took to use against us. Your leader took a good deal of them. One of the multis had 30 OPs built by him alone. BD is not a game about who can get the most friends to abuse us the most free resources. Learn to play legitimately.
Yes they were supposed to build nukes and nuke you, just like your subs sent nukes to us. Nothing wrong with that. They were not marked blue, so Avi went ahead and took it, against Dees telling people not to. That is also not a violation.
Quote:
Who said it was your option to be removed? The relic placement was random and you had no more right to it than we did. You decided to attack it. Your fault.
Again, I never said we assumed it was ours. I never said, you didnt have a right to claim it as much as we did, or anyone else did for that matter. My only concern was that we should have been able to nuke or ion those relics. Which is perfectly legal and it is what you would do if you had to kill units more effectively.
As for the rest of the points, I would reiterate them. They werent slaves. And it was not farming.Farming is large scale resource harvesting and that is what the ToS say. This wasnt the case here.
Of course in warfare you want the balance of the game to tip in your favor to win. Everyone knows this. Our original plan was for us to attack Africa while making you lose SA. But obviously Seth was too quick to intervene and ruin everything. That does not however make anything illegal.
Quote:
There was enough proof for the ban, considering the creator and primary admin said so. Play on a different server if you don't like the interpretation.
The primary admin was wrong. There was no proof. The ToS were misinterpreted. Ill play where I want, but there has to be only one interpretation of rules everywhere. That is the whole point of the argument. Saying E4 will have its own rules just doesnt make any sense and is totally unfair.
Quote:
I don't care if you are disappointed. You are one to share passwords, abuse farms, and use slave colonies. I try to play the game as clean as I can. I will never take lessons in morality from you. I play in a legitimate way and stray only to auto-correct things back into line with how they should be. I have a very strong belief in how things should be done and it has served me well over the many years I have played. If you disagree, you are free to be wrong. You tried a trick and stumbled through it with using slave colonies, which opened those two players to being banned. They were no longer vital to your plans, so the level of hate here on the forums is ridiculous. Obviously you're displacing your frustration from the era on Seth and it's not fair.
You dont need to care that I am dissapointed. We didnt share passwords, abuse farms or use slave colonies. Just because someone interpreted them as such does not mean we did it. SEcondly I am not teaching you any lessons in morality. I dont believe in morality ingame, I have my own sense of integrity and I am at peace with myself, unlike you that maybe has the need to prove something to someone. I am totally not frustrated with the era. The only frustration if at all I have, was the fact that we were not let to fight because of Seths actions, as I am not one to shy away from a battle. If you misinterpret arguments as hatred, you are free to do so, I am not here to change opinions, just state mine. But it shows, that you are being childish and immature over a game, and again it isnt my problem. Its solely yours. But personal opinion here and that too out of goodwill, because obviously you dont consider us friends anymore - Its probably time you quit the game and took a deeper look at how much this game is important to you, your ego and your self esteem. You'd be apalled. You might go on to type a rude or an insulting comment, but that doesnt change the truth now, does it? Maybe its because of that you choose to call your actions "Bringing a flaw to light" and what we did as a "violation".
BTW You play the game well alright. But you certainly pull every trick in the book and you have done things similar. So I wouldnt add too much of credibility to your repeated accusations of dirty tactics.