why it is nor removed from a game?
low-priority i guess
Posts by nemuritor98
-
-
AFAIK it is disabled in all maps.
-
Not that either, as my game is on the 34th day.. So makes no sense to me.
Mine is 33rd day, I was just trying to find a reasonable non-guilty explanation
-
Well, I guess it's also bugged then.. Because my troops did open fire against a neutral unit while on agressive mode and an infantry of mine attacked a neutral unit in the sea too.
The only reasoning would be that the change only applies to the games made after the update was live, but that isn't stated in the news.
-
Now I am really confused, if you check the screenshots, my relation with JEJU is a peace-peace one and the cruiser I have near it which is within the range of JEJU's province is set to AGGRESIVE but it has not triggered war and it's been like that for the last 10 hours, more or less because I set it thinking that your update would work, but, surprisingly it doesn't.
Aggressive fire mode: Limited to range units. Units will bombard enemy and neutral units.
I beg to differ that they will.
I prefer to think that you are already making changes in the LIVE version without notifying the users than to think that the update you made for the blockade to be a thing, just pissed off all of us without giving us anything worth it.
-
or instead of having a CIRCLE for flags, maybe we should have a rectangle
I mean it sounds pretty damn logic to me
-
i was hoping for beta tests or something along these lines
Maybe we already beta-tested it with the Flanders Front event
-
end of August 2019
-
I mean, I'm taking a look at the answers Dorado Games gave, those who made Conflict of Nations, with the help of Bytro, regarding users complaints about P2W and their game as a whole and it's simply disgusting.
I'll snapshoot some of them
This last one isn't from the developer but I think it's somehow related to this topic so I'll add it too
This last comment, sadly, is too true, specially the fact that you can't fool the steam community and you can't censure them, that's the reason S1914, CoW and CoN have 50/50 in votes of being good or bad and other F2P strategy games have over 70%, or more, of good reviews
Right now their votes are:
CoN: [Overall(317 opinions): 49% good and 51% bad]CoW: [Overall(1.546 opinions): =51% good and 49% bad] Recent opinions(last 30 days) gives them 72% good opinions.
S1914: [Overall(47 opinions): 47% good and 53% bad]
-
Bashing gold users is not the problem, the problem is rude bashing.
You'd get banned from both.
Saying that SpartanBG uses gold is reason enough to get banned according to the rules.
We can't change the Pay to Win system established within the Bytro Games, but while knowning that we'll probably get banned by being specific when it comes to P2W, well, then we better shut up and talk somewhere else or just leave the game.
-
i have another option in order to select those units
if you know the code of your units, such as unit CC27 then search for it with Ctrl+f
if you don't know the code of your units, then you have 2 options:
if it's a mechanized unit, such as artillery, tanks, battleships, etc, try search for it in the diplomacy while simulating the offer of a unit, you'll get a list of your units and try to search for those that could be the unit that its trapped, you'll get the right one sooner or laterthe other option is to click a unit and use arrows, left and right, to swip between units until you get to the unit that it's stuck, that way you'll have it selected and you'll be able to move it, also, you'll now know the unit code
-
you can't spectate it even if your aren't banned, spectate mode has been broken for quite a while
Now I have a map on which one toxic player is continuing to insult me in newspaper after I was banned. I would liek to have means to report him and continue progress of my friends on the map. Hopefully helping them as much as I can with my expertise. I find it disturbing that such a player can report me and I go off from the map while he does much worse things and still plays without any problems.
always report the content that breaks the rules, if not you, your friends
-
It was in frontline pioneer games. No feedback received.
I haven't seen any announce about it being there, not here, not in CoW so...
-
uh, this is going to be a funny one
so are we allowed to talk about bugs?
-
I'm wondering, why didn't this make it first to the Frontline Pioneer games? Isn't the FP supposed to try things first and deliberate whether or not it's balanced and whether or not to include it in the game?
-
I'll suggest a even better way, use external chats/forums so you wont risk to get banned.
Dont talk about GM's in S1914 and you'll be fine.
-
agree with you
here's when the Fine Print comes and saysYou can only pay those 10k GM per month with paid Goldmarks, not Goldmarks you earn by winning games.
that would be funny, annoying, but funny
-
got a better idea- to remove that feature you need to have HQ or pay Bytro 10 k GMs per month
that'd be a scam, but if i had no choice, i'd take the "pay 10k GM per month" option
-
I really hope to see tomorrow a removal of this new "feature".
-
Display MoreLet's keep that discussion where it belongs, which is in the past. Also no offence taken. Idealy you want a fully automated support crew (yes I'd love to be replaced if a bot did my work at least as well) but a bot sadly gets a lot of contexts wrong etc etc, look at the chat censor bot, or the bot that does kick multi accounts and at times accidently missfires.
While humans are also bound to make mistakes etc etc. The main thing I think is that any sort of tournament placed on the shoulders of any sort of crew can turn into something almost unmanagable, the previous tournament took a lot of effort because some actual vital game mechanics are not implemented. A new tournament either of the alliance or the pvp kind would require a move for additional mechanics by bytro or we will be deemed to see a repeat in the heavy work load.
So both approaches are not 100% see through a combination of some vital game mechanical options supervised by a crew would be the ideal option.
of game mechanics I imagen e.g. GM free game mode, limited Share map, etc etc all stuff that needed to be checked manually in the previous attempt resulting in a lot of work and if somebody broke the rules it led to a continuous running behind on the issues or as they say in dutch "Dweilen met de kraan open" (mop with an open water source).i strongly disagree with a lot of this,
first off let's not forget whose fault is it that there are no official tournaments, or even "additional mechanics" that fits into a competitive field
second, i've seen from inside how the tournament was managed, there was a lot of work put into it, specially for the manual gold checks and things like that and I know the organizers did their best to have an at least decent tournament, but there've been mistakes that even I wouldn't accept in a future version of it and if those mistakes were to continue, I myself wouldn't participate in the tournament.
you say that a bot would get a lot of context wrong, while that is true, it doesn't fit well to what happened in this tournament where context took a role, but not the role it should have been
bugs, exploits or "mechanics there were not thought to be used that way", as i said internally, there's nothing, not in the game rules not in the T&C that specially says that bugs are not allowed and what is considered a bug as bytro won't display their mistakes in public, which from my point of view is another mistake
you say "look at the chat censor bot, or the bot that does kick multi accounts and at times accidently missfires."
for me, a chat censor bot, similar to the one we have, applying the rules we have, looks like would suit in a My Little Pony server. and trust me, i've also seen quite a few accidently missfires that were not made by a bot
and I could go on and on about this matter, but I don't want to extend too much, have a nice evening
