Posts by Edwylm

    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.

    Game rewards/payouts

    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.

    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.

    Switching to mobile view and not being able to switch back to desktop mode is a known bug and has been mentioned to our developers.

    To switch back to desktop mode, please log out of your game and clear your browser cache. This should resolve your problem.

    The aggressive fire does have ups and downs. I dislike that it will kill everything when you don't want it too. however, I like aspect of the aggressive fire being able to attack units/players that are invading. when a nation declares war on you through diplomacy your units do not fire until you are attacked. this helps with sneak attacks from neutral nations.

    there are many aspects one must consider
    1 hnr is a real strategy in irl take that away how would a small nation defend itself? take away hnr and you just have number battles, also it just be fort defense on land and using meat shields again. it wouldn't be so bad to have a combat retreat feature that might work but its difficult to see without being able to test it. activity would be nice but its a hard work around to fix the issue.

    2 Your solution you given to "solve they problem" 500 and 100 maps wouldn't be much time to build anything mid to late game. games like these types of games do not place time limitations they add drawbacks negative affects so players are lead to manage game time/resources.

    in normal fighting conditions you need to spend about 5-10 mins within every hour. now having some drawbacks would be interesting but still it be unrealistic to implement and to relate to irl. the only thing i can see is to add some kind of communication net work feature which would delay orders and to have spies sabotage it. But then i would have to say that spies in general need to be reworked so that they hit at random times other than right at day change.

    3 there is no fix for attacking afk players for a rts game unless there was a pause button. there are many players around the world with different times they play.

    While memes are part of the thread's topic, they can be posted here.

    From forum rules

    f) So-called spamming or hazing, creating postings containing only smilies or individual words is prohibited. Basically a post should contribute to the topic and be self-explanatory.

    While memes are ok in off-topic, however this is feedback thread one or two might not be bad but there is a line as where it will be viewed as spamming.

    The idea of aircraft carriers/seaplanes was suggested long time ago in the old forums. The use of them were limited seeing only little action in ww1 where the true aircraft carriers were invented after ww1. it be interesting but i would find it a bit to much like playing a ww2 game/CoW than a ww1 game if they were added in.

    However the best place to discuss new or missing features please post in the Missing Feature forum.

    Thank you Ed. Im actually curious what you think about the new update though man.

    concerning about the big changes.

    ---adding elite AI

    well it does create more of a challenge however the elite AI isn't so much the best, they lack tactics, coronation with allies, to ally with a AI is hard even then not worth it as when you declare war most nations think negative about you. it does help with preventing holding AI capitals to use as morale buffs however due to how elite AI acts you be getting -25 war morale and can't protect all borders which will suck.

    ---Units cannot be traded anymore

    this is something i disliked i wouldn't mind if it was relationship perspective only allowing Share map, RoW or coalition members. even then neutral nations should be able to, to be realistic.

    ---Trading resources via diplomatic trading is limited to coalition and team members

    not good for lone players and how they go about this in non coalition or team games? i haven't experimented with loner gameplay in a while.

    ---After leaving a coalition players have to wait 3 days before they can join or create a new coalition

    ---After being kicked from a coalition players have to wait 1 day before they can join or create a new coalition they walk hand in hand, are those leaving/kicked have a protection time so they don't get killed by their former allies? i can see being kicked but leaving is up to the player. however still hurting them if they can't trade.

    However things can change, is the change right away maybe idk, the devs have several games to work with so updates to fix issues might be slow. remember they release Supremacy 1 a few months ago so focus on other games will be slower.

    All right a warning to all since i have seen this topic go off topic to what is intended along with rules breaks and getting toxic.

    First off a list of rule breaks,

    Insulting other forum users or the staff is prohibited. This already results from the rules of etiquette.

    The naming or denunciation of users / players, whom (allegedly) exploit bugs or other inconsistencies, is not permitted, as this can lead to unjustified accusations

    Denouncing of gms usage and those that buy gms is not permitted.

    As things are going, please stay on topic as this is for game-play feedback for this update. Respectful and constructive criticism are always nice however if it goes off topic or it gets bad enough with toxic feedback the devs might not even look to see the feedback that would help improve the game. If this topic stays toxic then it might be closed and if it continues to other patch notes feedback then the devs might not even ask for feedback.

    This has been suggested in the past however so far no implement into the game. adding a new navel unit would likely mean new balancing issues. for example subs are fairly week if they are found by themselves and are not that efficient in combat due to it being a melee unit. thus why it has stealth to make it usable. adding this unit isn't needed as you can build subs yourself or use infantry to act as meat-shields/finders for subs. to be realistic subs should be able to hit and run and not be in stuck in melee.