TheLegendRjsturgill wrote:Having an account created just to give it moons, then deleting everything so its back down to 1.6k points, and allowing people to fleet save to it, just isnt right.

This is against the rules (and if it's not, it definitely should be). That is a form of multi-accounting.

In regard to the suggestion, I would be fine with it being in alliance only FS for under 10k, but then people will still abuse it. They'll just be in the same alliance. At least, that's the way I see it, and that makes this whole thing rather pointless.

To the main reason for the suggestion:

Is FS'ing with a noob's moon legal? At this point, yes, as long as there is no other rule-breaking happening.

Is it "honorable"? Well, that depends on your definition of honor. Some say yes, some say no. You could argue they cheat the system, but you could also argue they use what they have. Both sides have valid points, both sides have been presented here. However, it becomes hard to make rules to stop dishonorable play from happening because, at what point do you stop?

Finally, someone comes out with an unbiased statement. Karroth, i believe you are 100% correct on this, and I think you have had the best feed back thus far. My opinion on what Karroth said is this, you have to weigh out the pros and the cons at hand, and I do mean actually do so, and come to a reasonable solution that could fit both side of the argument. So far this hasn't been done, and I think we should start fresh and start doing that now.

I also agree with Karroth 100%. I don't mean to be a hypocrite, but Karroth is completely right in every aspect.

while karroth said it good... but i still stick with my flaming, (FLAME'S I.B.)

It seems like a legitimate strategy. A kind of douchey one, but it keeps your fleet safe. I'm just surprised no one has brought it up before.

I personally don't think a rule should be made about it, but then again I don't fleet so I'm a tad biased.

I for one can still remember being a n00b.. Part of the fun of this game, learning how to keep your fleet.. avoiding higher ranked players.. finding ways to stay safe..

There are many ways to fleet save, the Golden rule to keeping your fleet.. There are rules set within the game to protect us at the start (the 10k n00b protection rule) a very good idea. So someone has found away to exploit this. However this goes against the reason it was set up.. If this is a bug, then they should be banned for bug using..

1st no one under 10k needs protection by a high ranking player as they can not be attacked by anyone over 10k anyway. A small amount of defence will prevent this at the start..

2nd In the case that Torgard has posted, it appears this account was set up purely for this event. Now in my opinion this is against the rules/cheating. no n00b has this amount of moons with no development except acs depots etc.. clearly this is or should be against the rules.

3rd You may say what if there is a war then the n00b looses n00b protection.. but like wise in this case the rules would change and a higher ranked player can then acs defend, but also the enemy would be able to attack/probe..so the advantage would be lost..

4th To my knowledge. In truth only myrsee had 100k BC until Kronic. so gumppy never attacked anyone with 100k bc 600 bs maybe..lol

To sum up this post ZE/admin need to check and revise this issue.. clearly a error that needs to be addressed. Be it a second account or a friend/relative asked to set an account for this purpose.
If you can't attack a player in n00b protection, or even spy on them then you should not be able to acs defend them. Only mission that should be allowed would be transport (but cargo ships only)

If it's multiplay, then yes it's not allowed. That's bee a rule since day one. But multiplay and ACSing someone under 10k aren't the same thing.

Weresloth wrote:It seems like a legitimate strategy. A kind of douchey one, but it keeps your fleet safe. I\\\'m just surprised no one has brought it up before.

I personally don\\\'t think a rule should be made about it, but then again I don\\\'t fleet so I\\\'m a tad biased.

Now I would like to state, I am replying to this as a player to a player.. as you have posted (personally)

what the **** are you talking about a legitimate strategy. Its a clear exploitation of a rule. This is a War game. Moons where implemented to hide fleets from Phalanx.. MD missions where created to remove moons there has always been an equal strategy to balance the game. How is this the case here. More so as it appears the account was set up purely for this purpose. How can someone of your position advocate such game play.?


--snip--

Edited and 1 warning for trolling, there was no need for that at all. ~ Istalris

Well this is interesting, gotta give it to the person that discovered this.

There are many ways you can look at this but sadly there is only ever going to be the two opposing extremes butting heads. My own opinion is that with the current game mechanics it should stay, BUT in this case it is clear the account has been set up purely for this purpose, and THAT is what I find absurdly exploitive, not this mechanic itself.

You also have to consider that this may be one of those things that were never actually intended and just a side effect of a rushed development and release. Just like the fact that recalled deploy missions were never meant to be visible to Phalanx, but of course none of the big experienced fleeters complain about that.. just an observation.

But yeah, in conclusion, my opinion is keep it. This specific situation however needs to be dealt with as an exploit of rule loopholes. Finding an epic fleetsave, awesome, and you guys did a brainfart by letting the rest of the game know how to do it, setting up an account specifically for the purpose though, extreme exploitation.

Oh and lastly, there is no flaming going on here, just a healthy heated discussion. Flaming is defined as insults directed as a person or group of people, we will step in and stop it if it happens.

Istalris wrote:Well this is interesting, gotta give it to the person that discovered this.

There are many ways you can look at this but sadly there is only ever going to be the two opposing extremes butting heads. My own opinion is that with the current game mechanics it should stay, BUT in this case it is clear the account has been set up purely for this purpose, and THAT is what I find absurdly exploitive, not this mechanic itself.

You also have to consider that this may be one of those things that were never actually intended and just a side effect of a rushed development and release. Just like the fact that recalled deploy missions were never meant to be visible to Phalanx, but of course none of the big experienced fleeters complain about that.. just an observation.

But yeah, in conclusion, my opinion is keep it. This specific situation however needs to be dealt with as an exploit of rule loopholes. Finding an epic fleetsave, awesome, and you guys did a brainfart by letting the rest of the game know how to do it, setting up an account specifically for the purpose though, extreme exploitation.

Oh and lastly, there is no flaming going on here, just a healthy heated discussion. Flaming is defined as insults directed as a person or group of people, we will step in and stop it if it happens.

I for one totally agree that recalled deploy missions should NOT be visible on Phalanx.. I am also good with healthy banter..lol.. Of course I can not agree on keeping such a clear misuse of an error.. So maybe ZE could correct both of these. I would love the opportunity to do a blind lanx ..