Re: Discussion about surrender

seaborgium · by seaborgium on Wed Oct 21, 2009 10:32 pm

Casshern wrote:Since it has been clearly stated that some members have left WR. We The Imperium Empire wish to give these members a way of clearing themselves from any further actions from The Imperium Empire. Also these will be extend to any current member of WR who wishs to leave the war. To have your surrender accepted you must agree with the following terms.

1. WR were wrong in their assertions on The Imperium Empire.
2. You agree to not support WR in their war effort against us.
3. You will not take on WR members as officers or commanders and leave them if you are currently an officer or commander of a WR.
4. You will not trade with Wr members during the war
5. Any violation of the above will lead to action being taken against You.

So to surrender you just need to post here agreeing to the terms. Once this has occurred The Imperium leadership will discuss your surrender and return a verdict with 48 hrs.
Ps We have a full list of WR members before this war started, so even if you have left before the alliance became hidden you will need to surrender.

wow server war much

I am in the alliance, and I think thats crap

1. I can understand
2. I can understand this too
3. Thats kinda dumb, considering the fact that WR, and Imperium make up 85% of the active decent accounts
4. Ya can't really help this since the ingame kinda doesn't tell you who ya selling/buying from
5. Can't really argue this one.

Kenzu · by Kenzu on Wed Oct 21, 2009 11:01 pm

Yeah, its like saying, don't trade with anyone!
Because I dont think there are many accounts with SS outside TIE and WR.

Sandwalker · by Sandwalker on Thu Oct 22, 2009 12:03 am

There are. Now why don't you two leave this thread for what it is meant and go discuss the crap out of it somewhere else. Wouldn't that be best?

seaborgium · by seaborgium on Thu Oct 22, 2009 12:52 am

The best thing isn't to push people around. Thats the #1 way for them to stop playing.

Yes there are a good bit with SS outside of TIE and WR, but how many of them really play?

Notice how my post says

make up 85% of the active decent accounts

Sandwalker · by Sandwalker on Thu Oct 22, 2009 1:16 am

I believe it is less than 85%. I would comment on your first phrase but, as I tried to emphasize in my previous post, this is not the place to do it, at least from my perspective.

We can always talk about the pushing around bit somewhere else, though I feel it has been discussed for too long. The way I see it, we're pushing back, and that's all I've got to say on this matter.

Also, point 3 doesn't affect WR THAT much. It just looks big, it's not really big.

Special Agent 47 · by Special Agent 47 on Thu Oct 22, 2009 1:38 am

seaborgium wrote:wow server war much

I am in the alliance, and I think thats crap

1. I can understand
2. I can understand this too
3. Thats kinda dumb, considering the fact that WR, and Imperium make up 85% of the active decent accounts
4. Ya can't really help this since the ingame kinda doesn't tell you who ya selling/buying from
5. Can't really argue this one.

1. mute
2. mute
3. No it is Not dumb. Officers supply their CO's with UU, that same UU is sold for funds or used to fight the war against us. I have seen people with total UP almost double their raw this way. Commanders give Kewal to their officers and again those funds are used to wage war. So if you don't mind people directly funding someone else's war against you that's fine, I on the other hand do have a problem with it.
4. The Galactic market is open to all, and has NO regulation concerning it. As you have pointed out it is anonymous. The Private Trade Broker is not. This is where we look to cut supply lines. I Don't Know any intelligent leader that when faced with war does not look to cut enemy supply lines.
5. mute

Point being, whats the point of allowing any WR members to surrender and not be involved in the war, if they keep supplying the few WR members fighting? Isn't that rather stupid?

seaborgium · by seaborgium on Thu Oct 22, 2009 3:03 am

how do you plan on seeing who has brokered someone?

Kenzu · by Kenzu on Thu Oct 22, 2009 4:44 am

They cannot check trades
(unless it will be completely obvious, like a million units from one player to another one)

I think they hope for an update that will make it possible to check
(not gonna happen during this war)

Special Agent 47 · by Special Agent 47 on Thu Oct 22, 2009 11:10 am

Kenzu wrote:They cannot check trades
(unless it will be completely obvious, like a million units from one player to another one)

I think they hope for an update that will make it possible to check
(not gonna happen during this war)

As Kenzu pointed out, there is no sure way to check brokers, but there are many signs that can be watched for. Not to mention it is amazing how many people will tell off on themselves.

You also think very WRONG Kenzu. This is why we are at war now. STOP trying to put words in our mouths and paint us as the bad guys asking for updates to give us advantages. It is complete and total BS. I am personally 100% against ways to spy trade logs. ADMIN is the one promoting the idea, not us.

And glad to know ingame wars can effect updates being released. Shows poor conduct on the behalf of the admins as far as I am concerned. Hate to know that once the game gets active it will die because sooner or later there will ALWAYS be some war somewhere. Makes me wonder how long it will be before you finally give up so we can get some updates in the game since you claim no updates are allowed during war, and we are very much at war.

I hope one day you learn to watch your mouth, for the sake of WR.

Admin · by Admin on Thu Oct 22, 2009 11:21 am

Special Agent 47 wrote:It is complete and total BS. I am personally 100% against ways to spy trade logs. ADMIN is the one promoting the idea, not us.

Well, there's more urgent updates before that one is done. Plus a lot of unsolved questions before I can even start working on it.

Special Agent 47 wrote:And glad to know ingame wars can effect updates being released. Shows poor conduct on the behalf of the admins as far as I am concerned.

Care to elaborate on that? Because I feel to be part of that statement.
Although I'm probably just misunderstanding something

seaborgium · by seaborgium on Thu Oct 22, 2009 11:57 am

i took that as not happening now but if it would happen.

Universe · by Universe on Thu Oct 22, 2009 3:22 pm

Admin wrote:
Special Agent 47 wrote:And glad to know ingame wars can effect updates being released. Shows poor conduct on the behalf of the admins as far as I am concerned.

Care to elaborate on that? Because I feel to be part of that statement.
Although I'm probably just misunderstanding something

I think our resident Agent was referring to this:

Kenzu wrote:I think they hope for an update that will make it possible to check
(not gonna happen during this war)

Kenzu implies a direct relation between the fact that there is a war going on, and whether or not updates will be released. In other words, a conditional: War? Yes = No update.
To which SA's response is reasonable, i.e. that it would be strange if ingame wars would affect or stall the release of updates.

Admin · by Admin on Thu Oct 22, 2009 3:40 pm

eh k, whatever

Kenzu · by Kenzu on Fri Oct 23, 2009 9:25 pm

Special Agent 47 wrote:
Kenzu wrote:They cannot check trades
(unless it will be completely obvious, like a million units from one player to another one)

I think they hope for an update that will make it possible to check
(not gonna happen during this war)

As Kenzu pointed out, there is no sure way to check brokers, but there are many signs that can be watched for. Not to mention it is amazing how many people will tell off on themselves.

You also think very WRONG Kenzu. This is why we are at war now. STOP trying to put words in our mouths and paint us as the bad guys asking for updates to give us advantages. It is complete and total BS. I am personally 100% against ways to spy trade logs. ADMIN is the one promoting the idea, not us.

I have merely stated my view. Just because I said that I think you guys would want such an updated doesn't mean it's a bad thing. Do you want to say that your alliance is against the update? I don't think you have talked to everyone to be in a position to talk for all alliance members.

And glad to know ingame wars can effect updates being released. Shows poor conduct on the behalf of the admins as far as I am concerned. Hate to know that once the game gets active it will die because sooner or later there will ALWAYS be some war somewhere. Makes me wonder how long it will be before you finally give up so we can get some updates in the game since you claim no updates are allowed during war, and we are very much at war.

I hope one day you learn to watch your mouth, for the sake of WR.

I would like to know how a war has affected updates. Please tell me a few examples. Admin is doing a great job and he working much more than you think.

Why should the game die because of a war?

You make it sounds like I am against all updates, when in fact I am suggesting a lot of updates myself and support many updates as well. I have never said that no updates will be allowed.

Stop lying!

seaborgium · by seaborgium on Fri Oct 23, 2009 11:53 pm

theres no lying....

He took what you wrote to mean that..

Slow down and reread what you wrote, the first time i read it i didn't take it like he posted. However after he posted I could see where he got it from.

you have 1 thing against you in all of this. your brother... its very hard to know what does/doesn't happen.