Well your opinions are obviously not supported by the ToS, the admin, or the developer. Only your team.

If you had some inkling of how game balance works, you wouldn't be on your side either.

Gating will likely be disabled for new members for 24 ticks after they join. Whether this will extend to their gate OPs as well, I'm not sure. That's up to Michael. He was simply made aware of the problem and he will fix it.

That's not strategy, just like getting friends to plant you OPs isn't strategy.

I am fine with all new updates to make the game more strategically.

Still i remember that you was banned for "pushing the buttons they gave to you"
viewtopic.php?f=86&t=8172&view=previous

Here we go You got also compensated btw.

I do not find it amusing when I believe that I am being ignored and you probably shouldn’t find it funny that the people have little faith in you. I am the consumer you know, and would not go to Chick-fil-A if I was ignored or laughed at when presenting a concern. Food for thought..No pun intended.

Enough of that, I think we have something to work with here. I really appreciate you taking the time to be straight up and provide your perspective on and how this issue affects you.

I read to page 3 and think I have all that I need to continue. NO continued to point out where they were wronged (Personally I agree with them) and Kevin of course commended you for the fantastic performance (Why wouldn’t anyone when they are the beneficiary from the actions of the commended. This is not the first time; I have seen him be on the receiving end of a decision that sure seemed like favoritism. And honestly, (I will be flogged and hanged for saying this) I like Kevin. Really though this is all a moot point. You said yourself there will always be someone who is unhappy with the decisions you make.

So we agree that BD is a game above the rest. And in comparing it appears that you are saying we are privileged to have the system that is provided. That may be so. I want to add that the same system that we are so honored to have, is the same one that is keeping this game above the rest including the following that makes this game successful. It is a two way street. I think I am safe to say: that following is frustrated and desires that privileged system of ours needs to be tweaked.

If the “powers to be” are considering possible solutions for this, I am pretty sure that the arguments provided are valid on all sides. I do not know if removing admins from the equation would get the desired result. I love that you used the word speculation, because it’s all speculation until you do it. Also, I have not read your other replies so I might be putting my foot in my mouth, but after reading this post I lean towards that you are doing the best you can with what you have and generally care about the community as a whole. Biased and all.

What I heard from all this was that I do the best I can, not everyone is going to be happy, you are doing a poor job and what you did was biased, and even a cheerleader or two with pom poms in hand, GOOOOO SETH. All of these positions stay in the problem.

I still propose the implementation of a review board. This way the community and admins can work together to resolve issues presented in game. Possibly remove some of the difficulties on both ends of the spectrum. I know someone said that there will be faults with this also, and that may be true. Then I read the rest of his post and it was nothing but wrongs committed. If I was an admin and read that, I would be like the hell with all of you. I could elaborate further on how this could be done and we can together work on specifics, though I am not going to delve into any further if it is not going to be considered. Seriously though, this can work. It will take the community and the admins to recognize that we can be the solution to this problem.

Or we just can just continue with the contention and miss out on the opportunity to move forward.

Probably should have read the rest of the posts before posting, I just wanted to make sure we were all the same page, which is page 8 btw.

My opinions are not supported by the ToS simply because it isnt there in the ToS. What we did was not a slave colony , it was use an ingame option. The ToS obviously wont state that you cant use an ingame option.

We all know about game balance, but what we did certainly didn't tip the game balance in our favor. It simply was strategy that you didn't expect.

If its an issue, I dont have any problems with it being fixed. As long as it is not fixed, it is either a bug, or a feature. We cant be blamed for it and punished on top of it. Thats just ridiculous.

First of all good on ya mate

Secondly, I did say that there could be some problems with the review board, simply because some players will be above the rest. But if this can work, no issues on discussing how to make it better for all. Ill start off with a positive, the admins today make decisions solely based on their judgements. There is nothing wrong if we can bring in a few other points of view to point out certain flaws in the way admining is done. That could probably bring out fairer decisions. Though people have to understand, there will always be flaws whatever is done.

Cheers!.

Slave colonies use in game options but are still illegal, there is a precedent for it.

The issue Ilona is referring to in the link there was when I was temp-banned by Andrew for something that has never been addressed before. There is a difference between throwing out bans for something that was never before addressed, and banning for the longtime known abuse of slave colonies.

It wasnt a slave colony. The colony got banned even as he was in NO. Secondly, slave colonies are ones that are used to spam and lay outposts for others, for the purposes of resources. What we did was not gain resources. Infact we lost resources because of those two colonies, on top of losing 2 armies. Also it was an option available ingame. Even this issue of gating hasn't been addressed ever before. If it was, we wouldn't have the option available.

That one player was in NO only to use as a shielded OP. The other one was kicked immediately after being used as a gate. That's a slave colony.

Simple.

Taking a member in an alliance. Gaining no resources from him. And kicking him is completely valid. Its not slave abuse. Simple.

Well you're wrong, as indicated by the admin, developer, and most other players.