magicninja Posted July 19, 2013 Report Share Posted July 19, 2013 Ok its been awhile and some alliances, namely my own, are taking their time purging ghosts from their roster. Now that ghosts on Bob can be eliminated easily...will you treat "ghosts" the same? Here's what I mean. Before the update when you see a rogue on your alliance warscreen that had an AA that is well known you go to the government of that alliance and ask the status of the rogue. If it was a ghost you usually would be cleared to kill the ghost or lean on them for reps...whatever you did etc. Now after the update will you be holding an alliance accountable for any member of the AA that has "approved member" status? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Maximus Posted July 19, 2013 Report Share Posted July 19, 2013 Its easy to rid your AA of ghosts now, the alliance should be responsible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Centurius Posted July 19, 2013 Report Share Posted July 19, 2013 I'd say it's impossible to say as it all depends on the cooperation, or lack thereof, the other alliance provides. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex987 Posted July 19, 2013 Report Share Posted July 19, 2013 Well it depends. If the nation goes rogue while on the AA but after a reasonable amount of time is removed by the alliance, the proper protocol should be the same as was before the update. But if the nation is still on the AA after an extended amount of time, the alliance can be held accountable to a greater degree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rayvon Posted July 19, 2013 Report Share Posted July 19, 2013 I don't see it really changing how we're gonna handle them at all; approved or not, if they're on the other alliance AA - they'll be pursued in the same manners. The only thing that mattered, was on the AA or not; that is still the case. 'Approved' or not is just a case of how long the aggrieved party took to contact said harbouring alliance about the ghost and if the harbouring alliance has had time to process them or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Chocolate Posted July 19, 2013 Report Share Posted July 19, 2013 Considering that an alliance owner can chose to kick out nations at this point, I'd start with the assumption that a member is a member and go from there. However, that doesn't mean that I would assume that the alliance as a whole is at fault. It's not just traditional "ghosts" that can go off and decide to do something dumb on their own. An accepted member can do things like attack some other group without permission still. Thus, before doing anything I'd contact the other alliance leadership and see what they have to say. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Williambonney Posted July 19, 2013 Report Share Posted July 19, 2013 I voted a although I am torn between a and b...they almost look like matches to me :psyduck: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander shepard Posted July 19, 2013 Report Share Posted July 19, 2013 Considering that an alliance owner can chose to kick out nations at this point, I'd start with the assumption that a member is a member and go from there. Considering how a nation is an applicant to an alliance until they're approved(depends on restrictions) it would be better to assume they're applicants. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
berbers Posted July 19, 2013 Report Share Posted July 19, 2013 Is approval the only option to join now or can you disable the feature? Also I would expect diplomacy and being reasonable will continue to be the norm. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Chocolate Posted July 19, 2013 Report Share Posted July 19, 2013 Considering how a nation is an applicant to an alliance until they're approved(depends on restrictions) it would be better to assume they're applicants. Actually, the new system allows for some cool features for alliance owners. (yes, I am one) The options can be placed on open membership (so people can just join as before) or Approval or Closed. Anyone can check and see which by looking at the alliance. Taking that into account - if I checked and the method was "Open" - then could be a ghost. If it's "approval" then when someone applies but isn't accepted you can see "pending" on their nation. In my mind, this might be a "ghost" too or an applicant. If approval is used, then the owner actually has go through a relatively easy step in order to approve. Also, the system allows the owner to give out alliance titles that appear on the nation. So if someone is an applicant, one could accept them but put in the title "applicant" - or for that matter "friendly ghost" if a group is okay with someone sitting on their AA but wants to make it clear the person isn't a member. Personally, IF tJL had a problem with some individual nation attacking, I'd just contact the other groups leadership regardless and not create any drama about it unless seriously told off by the other group. But I'm rather laid back for an alliance leader. We're the local friendly coffee shop after all. However, that doesn't mean that I trust other alliance leaders to be as reasonable. This is Planet Bob. I expect drama sometime around this exact issue. Better to be prepared than not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scorn Posted July 27, 2013 Report Share Posted July 27, 2013 I am not sure why you are still using the term ghost rogue. Seems like a relic of the past. There can still be rogues, but the presence of ghosts should be part of a bygone era. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magicninja Posted July 27, 2013 Author Report Share Posted July 27, 2013 I am not sure why you are still using the term ghost rogue. Seems like a relic of the past. There can still be rogues, but the presence of ghosts should be part of a bygone era.That's pretty much exactly the point. Would you now accept the excuse of a "ghost rogue"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neo Uruk Posted July 27, 2013 Report Share Posted July 27, 2013 It doesn't have to be a ghost to be a rogue... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YOLO SWAG Posted July 27, 2013 Report Share Posted July 27, 2013 Some other way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samwise Posted July 27, 2013 Report Share Posted July 27, 2013 In TE I've seen gov let people stay pending on an AA because: 1. It doesn't affect their stats 2. In an AA war, they're likely to be DoWed, so it's a couple less war declarations on their actual members 3. Their offensive/defensive wars do not show up on their war/spy screen However, if it's an approved member, and he goes rogue, it's possible that the member may be facing expulsion so you'll still need to approach the AA to see if they'd like to pay reps or let you light him up depending on the situation. Ghosts that have their membership approved should be a thing of the past. If you have ghosts approved on your AA, they can read your alliance announcements in-game. I wouldn't just kick them, but move them to pending status and send them a message saying that they have a certain amount of time to either apply or look for another alliance or they'll be removed from the AA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChairmanHal Posted August 16, 2013 Report Share Posted August 16, 2013 I'd say it's impossible to say as it all depends on the cooperation, or lack thereof, the other alliance provides. Pretty much this. Alliances usually take in member with the best of intentions. They may also have open approval but then closely monitor who joins the AA and kick people who don't apply or get rejected for permanent membership. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wes the wise Posted August 22, 2013 Report Share Posted August 22, 2013 Is approval the only option to join now or can you disable the feature? Also I would expect diplomacy and being reasonable will continue to be the norm. I'm almost sure you can disable the feature. I would expect diplomacy and reason to rule the day in most instances...but you just never know. Might have to deal with you. O.O Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Groucho Marx Posted August 23, 2013 Report Share Posted August 23, 2013 (edited) I know we would immediately respond against the rogue regardless of whether or not the nation is approved on the AA in which they reside. We would still contact the leadership of the AA the individual resides on to clarify what was happening and depending upon the circumstances, reparations would most likely be involved or an EoG sentence. Edited August 23, 2013 by Emperor Marx Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
berbers Posted August 23, 2013 Report Share Posted August 23, 2013 (edited) I know we would immediately respond against the rogue regardless of whether or not the nation is approved on the AA in which they reside. We would still contact the leadership of the AA the individual resides on to clarify what was happening and depending upon the circumstances, reparations would most likely be involved or an EoG sentence. Unless another AA grabbed the rogues slots first :P Edited August 23, 2013 by berbers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Groucho Marx Posted August 24, 2013 Report Share Posted August 24, 2013 Who could turn away genuine assistance? Aside from Anarchy Inc of course. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hereno Posted August 24, 2013 Report Share Posted August 24, 2013 Is approval the only option to join now or can you disable the feature? Also I would expect diplomacy and being reasonable will continue to be the norm. The approval part can be disabled. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yamuliss Posted September 2, 2013 Report Share Posted September 2, 2013 Well appearantly you threaten the rouge with war! Especially if its a new nation! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ascended Dio Posted September 2, 2013 Report Share Posted September 2, 2013 Well appearantly you threaten the rouge with war! Especially if its a new nation! Oh no, it's spreading to other threads!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yamuliss Posted September 2, 2013 Report Share Posted September 2, 2013 Oh no, it's spreading to other threads!!! No but your trolling other threads! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.