Hello Coffeepat, can you make a support ticket.
you can fallow these steps to atleast guide you in making a ticket. SUBMITTING A REPORT TO THE SUPPORT TEAM.
Also as a reminder is to not post rule violating names in public areas. If you have problems you can find a moderator to help out.
There are a few reasons why most games do not allow players to make factories and the respectful units until a curtain time.
1. Its a balance issue, as you can see every nation starts out with different resources, borders, and when the player joins the round. The first 8 days are to allow players to build up resources, gain land or build up their land. This is the main thing its balance and having a grace period for players to join.
2. It prevents multis from doing more damage.
Your post has been restored with the content in questioned removed.
If you have any questions or requests for review please seek out a Smod to review the content.
It seems that the site is broken.
Units are upgrade-able lower levels will not deal as much damage compared to a higher one. In addition units by themselves do not deal as much damage compared to units in a larger stack.
Range units are better than melee units because they attack by range there needs to have a balance. Lastly in ww1 artillery were inaccurate.
could you describe the situation, what was happening, did someone miss click a attack order, or change relation status.
Thread is closed and archived.
I would like to remind everyone to please be respectful and have a constructive discussion regard this matter.
As a reminder to please fallow the forum rules and please refrain yourselves of using swear words.
Are you using mobile or desktop? Also which type of map are you having this issue with?
this suggestion will likely never happen as its a feature thats not needed. because you can always place a buy/sell offer at a set price and try to work the market out. Also the AI tend to mess the markets up and players tend to play the stock market. Lastly when you join a game there are different offers set for each players which are not the cheapest nor expensive. But overall the feature will likely not happen as it will not be helpful in the long run.
This suggestion is similar to past ideas. It be nice to have a feature to increase the % of repair however one must remember the replacement of crew members and repairs. don't look at 1 tank and think its all by itself but 1 tank= more than 1 unit, like infantry are made up of more than 1 soldier.
Also one must consider lvl of factory which should make a difference can't repair a light tank with a lvl1 factory but a lvl 2 would take longer than a lvl3.
But the easy way that the devs avoid the manual repair is that all mech units auto repair regardless of prov morale and land ownership. So if damage you can repair in enemy lands compare to infantry where their morale will drop.
The feature has been suggested. the main issues are how to implement the idea and how to balance/prevent exploiting.
However one must consider that making a full retreat can cause greater loses because your enemy can cut off and retreats or keep your force fighting preventing such a full retreat. its all neat in theory but chaos rules the battlefield which the players can't control battlefield tactics. There are many outcomes. So to prevent such complex coding it be best just to leave the units kill each other till one survives.
If you are in a team game you can place defense spies in your allied territory.
Concerning outside team games. its tricky because players can turn on each other at any moment. its possible to add in but its going to be some work because you need to add in more text in newspaper and spy reports. Its not out of the realm of possibility.
I would like to remind everyone to remain on topic for their respectful threads. If there is no thread for the new topic feel free so it does not over take what threads are suppose to talk about.
On another note the aircraft carrier idea. Like in another thread that requested such feature this is what I stated. It will likely not happen mainly because in ww1 carriers were late and mostly in prototype stages. In addition they saw limited action. It be best to not add Aircraft carriers as ww1 was different than ww2 and should be.
To answer your first question about user names.
When you sign up and are suppose to read ToS. It states this
"4.5 During the registration process for the game, the Participant chooses a user name under which he will be registered as a Participant of the game. It is strictly prohibited to chose a name with content which is pornographic, racist, inciteful, glorifies war and/or violence, offensive or otherwise illegal. Breach of this clause entitles Bytro Labs to immediately exclude the Participant from the game."
Answering your second question is we do have chat rules listed here
Chat Rules - Rules - Supremacy - ForumThe chat does have a filter system in place but one can not filter all words. A lot of the chat rules are enforced in games as there is no real differences.
Concerning your last statement is that its best to not deputy mod as you will also be adding to the existing problem. The best way of doing so is to report such content and to avoid further complications.
Currently the system that figures who and how much of a payout when the game ends is by the following.
Both coalition and players not in the coalition are ranked in the same system. Now the ranking system is the percentage to the end game point goal. For normal games, solo players have the 1000 points to reach to win the game, for coalition its 1500 points. This means that if a solo player has 300 points (30%) compared to a coalition of 350 points (23.33%). Add in another solo player having 20% and a coalition 17% for the fallowing example.
1st place winner will be the 30% player, payout is the first place reward+ points
2nd place winner will be the 23.33% coalition team, payout is the 2nd coalition reward
3rd place winner is the 20% player, payout is the 3rd place +points
the 17% coalition will receive payout is 0 gms
The index of power does not determine the winner or who is wining. In order to know who is winning please look for a number between your profile and your resources or it might be placed above your resources bar. If its not showing you might have to zoom out your browser (not the map) for it to show. That is what rank/place you are in the game. Legacy mode does not have this feature
When you click on the number you will be shown the rank/place you and fellow players are in along with what reward you may receive. Each map is different and that the legacy mode newspaper reward is not updated to show the new rewards/ranks.
Also note that even inactive players are still in the ranking and will fill in the prized spots.
When a player/s join a coalition they give up the chance of winning/counted as a solo player.
In addition this means that all coalition members receive 0 gms that do not make it to the top reward rank needed.
However the solo players that are active and have Index power points will receive gms = to their index points.
Lastly if you become inactive the day the game ends you do not receive any rewards.
The Developers are looking into this issue, please be patient while they fix the problem.
What about when the player admits to multi-ing through a bragging personal message and then tells the Mods that the multi account belongs to their "wife"? This happened to me in my most recent game. I know what the player told the mods because the mod accidentally forwarded two of their responses to me.
I understand the data protection laws and we had to deal with Germany's pre-EU data laws when I was a GO but letting a player know that another anonymous player was cheating is not a violation. The Daily European used to have simple reports like "Player X was removed from the game" which covered everything.
I agree with the OP regarding the problems with cheating. Using GM is obviously not, but if a player is obviously multi-ing, admits it, and is then allowed to stay in the game even though the evidence is readily apparent through a quick look through my messages in-game how does that make it fair to the rest of us? Not to mention the loss some players might have who have paid for the GM only to have someone screw them over with a multi account.
Due to being pointed out as a "cheater" (if they are were or were not true) it does hurt their reputation and it is thus protected under Law and game rules. Reason why is that other players will not trust the so called "cheater" and players might try to seek to punish them.
For the mutli account part, each situation is different which is why we gather evidence. When a player admits, we have to confirm that they are a multi as they could be bluffing or trolling. But seeing that you were once a GO you should understand how difficult it is when dealing with muli accounts and confirming if its the same person.
Everyone is affected by multis But as I have stated some players will consider our insights as false making things even more complicated.
I am not a lawyer nor do I live in the countries that have adopted the EU data protection act. Germany being one of the nations having the law, Bytro has to obey to those laws. I will try my best to state what i'm going to explain.
There are curtain steps in the laws that we can not point out users. To avoid violating the laws its just best to not point out users and giving out what might be seen as "personal data". Is it right, that's debatable. It makes our job harder as we can not give out our reasons to the users or even clarify to the reporter of which report was handled. The term "cheaters" is perspective based. Because lot of people say using GMs is cheating which is not because is a game feature. If players fallow the rules than no action can be taken. We have to protect those that fallow the rules but also protect those that "cheat" because of Laws and even rules themselves.
When we used to give answers, we get a mix responses, quite a bit is that the player is convinced that the person they are accusing is violated the rules even if Staff rules that they are not violating any rule. This tends to to lead to many paths.
Overall I understand the frustration when it comes to the responses that we give.
"is it a normal way how we treat customers nowdays when it comes to reporting insults on chat, blacklisting, wolfpacking , account-pushing and begin attacked by multiaccoutns"
Even though we do not give out the actions made in responses, this does not make much of a difference when before giving out our actions in responses. Why is that? Its mainly because if you are in a game you are able to tell the difference when we take action as its a notable change.
Its going to take time for the Devs to fix the issue please be patience. Hopefully they will get it fixed soon.