XP and Attacks Between Alliances

[Schad]

I realize that you have previously addressed the matter -- insofar as a statement was made that the rules on slot-filling have not changed, full stop, no further explanation needed -- but I feel that something a little more needs to be issued on that front.

 

Warnings are now being handed out, in some cases putting nations within one warn of a ban (at least with those I'm aware; there could be outright bannings, I have no idea), but by virtue of the fact that there are literally hundreds of wars waged with allies or friends involving several dozen alliances, spanning at least a couple weeks and clearly undertaken with the intention of farming XP, the no-explanation explanation would appear not to have been self-explanatory; I doubt very much that those previously law-abiding nations have taken it upon themselves en masse to commit warnable offenses, but rather took the fact that the practice was common and did not appear to be incurring penalty as an indication that it was allowable. And that likely occurred because war gaming has being allowable in the past, and [url=http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?/topic/109060-war-slot-filling/#entry2918685]the rules as exist[/url] (that's the thread linked from the XP discussion) mention number of attacks and competition for slots, not damage, not attempts to inflict damage.

 

 

Would it thus be possible to produce clear guidance as to where the line between verboten XP farming and legitimate war-gaming is crossed, or is this "we know it when we see it?" And in situations where such a large group of people have misunderstood -- rather than intentionally violated -- the rules as they stood, would it be possible to issue a general warning to the membership of the game rather than going straight to in-game warnings? 

 

 

Derp, title was to say 'Attacks Between Allied Alliances', but I lose words sometimes. 

Edited August 6, 2013 by Schad

[Krispy]

Ridiculous, "(attempts to game the system are technically war slot filling)" Found here

There should be another way to gain XP through training then.  Thinking about it realistically, In the real world two nations could very well have training exercises where their troops gain experience.
Experience is also gained through training (Boot Camps, Military Drills, Aircraft/Naval Exercises etc).

So if inter-alliance war skirmishes for the purpose of gaining experience (which IMO is not gaming the system, but rather, PLAYING THE GAME) are not allowed and since warnings went out, then I propose there be some sort of option to send military on drills for a given period of time and they return with XP (these troops would be unavailable for a real war while out on training).

I'll post that in Suggestions area as well but it really is ridiculous that this was called out when previously inter-alliance Military drills were accepted.

Would these wars have been Overlooked if there were actual troop casualties?  (If we GA, would that still be grounds for warning?)



 

Edited August 6, 2013 by Krispy

[pd73bassman]

I understand that the moderation left the following term, "XP Farming" in the warn messages. I was wondering if anyone from moderation could direct me to a topic where this term was used and the rule was established. If it is indeed meant to be a violation then the wars should have been deleted, and then a statement of clarification following. I think going straight to in game warnings is ridiculous when people didn't knowingly break any rules.

[Krispy]

I understand that the moderation left the following term, "XP Farming" in the warn messages. I was wondering if anyone from moderation could direct me to a topic where this term was used and the rule was established. If it is indeed meant to be a violation then the wars should have been deleted, and then a statement of clarification following. I think going straight to in game warnings is ridiculous when people didn't knowingly break any rules.

 

I could not agree more.  I'd like some sort of response from the Admin/Moderation staff on this.  I will not be donating another penny to CN until there's some clarification on this and why it is not only not allowed, but why warnings were given out without specific/updated rules being posted on the topic.

 

 

 

[dockingscheduled]

The CN team really dropped the ball here. With a brand new in-game feature being introduced and all these "xp farming" wars being declared, would it not have been incredibly more logical to conclude that the rules regarding this new feature probably weren't clear enough? why assume that all these people suddenly decided to intentionally start breaking the rules and go straight to in-game warnings?

Edited August 7, 2013 by dockingscheduled

[Donnerjack]

I agree that the rule should be clearly posted. Cheating of this nature is forbidden by the terms of service. Although I do not think it takes much interpretation to arrive at that conclusion, it is not explicitly defined. I have been working on publishing a new set of game rules, but they are (self-evidently) not currently public.

I was lenient in this case because clarification of the rules in light of the game mechanics changes are not yet posted in a pinned thread (although a person who was unsure of the legality of this behavior could find it in this forum with a minimum of effort). Nonetheless, I cannot allow players to benefit from this mass cheating to the detriment of rule-abiding players. Applying in-game warns is an effective method of delivering the message to players who do not read the forums. These warnings cause no harm to your nation and will expire in 90 days. If you elect to cheat after receiving this clear message then you will lose your nation. If you don't, you will suffer no ill effect.