Posts by Furry1

    I agree with you that racist comments in the paper are not conducive to a good game. However, I have reported many articles in games for usage of "inappropriate language" or taunts and NOT ONCE have the GO's let it go. In extreme situations where someone continues after they have been warned and their posts have been removed, that person will also be banned from a round. I would be surprised to learn that nothing was done after several days of reports.

    Err Gentlemen, before you get any ideas about the lady Nashwah, I would urge you to check her profile. She is a 13 year old girl so I doubt she's an employee of Bytro. However, with that being said, welcome to the game, Nashwah.

    Are we talking about Coalitions or Alliances? If Coalition in a game, you CANNOT invite anyone to join the coalition, they have to apply. Which means you post in the paper and ask people to join your coalition. If we're talking about an Alliance, you set the rules and can invite individual players to join or you can have players apply to your Alliance and you can accept or deny them.

    Hey bud, I had some personal problems that I dealt with but I'm back at it now so all is good. Oh, and I agree there are a lot more female players in the game, I was just pointing out the two in the Alliance. See you out there Raman.

    If you're saying you're the only female employed by Bytro labs you may be correct, however, I personally know TWO female players of the game. One is my GF and the other is a friend. BOTH of them are in the Kingsman Alliance with me.

    the only thing bytro can offer players to stay in a round is gold, maybe after a week all active players get a small amount of gold and so on till the end of the round ????

    That is one possibility although too much free Gold is not good for Bytro either. Here's another concept, bring back the Daily Spin but attach it to the game. You get one free spin a day provided you're active in the game.

    I agree we don't want to push players away from the game. The idea is to get them to enter a round and stick around instead of vanishing after a couple days. So, instead of punishing them like I intimated, perhaps we can come up with some kind of incentive to keep them in the match? This is why I think you're right in keeping the thread open Demonaire.

    I had units today which were set for Offensive Fire control after killing my opponents units then started attacking an allies units whom I have shared maps with, this is new issue, ships set on Aggressive fire control is known but this is new with this update, Offensive fire control and share maps

    Please tell me you're joking and just trolling us because this is a MAJOR problem. I use Offensive fire a LOT and if I now have to worry about units going rogue and attacking ALLIES it completely negates one of the prime reasons to buy High Command.

    Again, a lot of it is subject to interpretation by a GO because they have the capability to be able to see the HISTORY.

    Some people make it easy. They join a map and become a farm for another player. Giving their resources on a daily or weekly basis in order to allow one player to expand easily. Other situations will have a player join a map, clear out his or her land and allow a player to take over and expand fast and easily. These can be spotted by blind men and if you see this kind of activity in a round, report it immediately so it can be investigated and dealt with by a GO. There are others that are not so easy to catch but again, GOs have tools to deal with things in investigations to confirm if any wrongdoing is going on.

    There are other "tells" on players who are up to no good but I'll keep those quiet right now so I don't give anyone ideas or ammo to work out how to come up with some kind of strategy to avoid those "tells".

    From the HOME page go into SETTINGS, then scroll down to the bottom and IF you had Legacy capability before, as in you joined 2016 or before, you will see a button saying ALLOW JOINING IN LEGACY MODE. If you never had Legacy mode before you will NOT see that button.

    This is an interesting discussion because viewing the situation from both sides you can see where both sides are right and wrong. In the first scenario, should A have left the game and allow the chips to fall where they may or did he do the right thing to try and help his team mate? Before you answer, think about the botched situation with leaving Afghanistan and the "enemy" gaining 85 Billion dollars worth of military hardware. Same thing might have happened if A had simply left the game and C and D took over the land with whatever was being built.

    The rules of ANY game cannot cover EVERY situation that comes up. THAT is why there are Game Operators who basically act as judges and like anything, not ALL judges interpret the law the same way. ALSO remember that you may or may not agree with the decision of a judge.

    I'll provide another example for you. I'm currently involved in a 500p game with my GF who also happens to be in my Alliance as well as my Coalition in the game. We're fighting in Africa and I've taken over a specific area while she is still fighting to take over the area that we decided was her territory. Now, two things. When she needs resources and I have excess in that resource, I provide it to her for Shared Intelligence or Shared Map. Right now with her fight, I'm using my air force to help clear the path for her to advance and take land. TECHNICALLY this could be seen as Account Pushing and could be argued that way, however, I would argue that it is nothing more than helping out a team player. Note: I have not said whether the land she's taking is controlled by players or by the computer - think about that before you decide whether it's account pushing or helping.

    Many people complain bitterly about joining a round and by day 10 or so there are only a HANDFUL of players left because most of the starting players have gone AI.

    Now one of the reasons that players go AI is to try and protect their statistics.

    What IF when you join a round you need to play it until the end or the losses you take after you have gone AI are still counted against your account? Oh and before anyone jumps on me and talks about it, YES, I have also gone AI in games to try and save my stats, so yeah, it will affect me too.


    You are going to see all kinds of tricks being used in games. If you suspect someone of doing what is known as "account pushing" report them and let the GOs handle it. Same with multi-accounting or any other infraction that violates TOS.

    Sorry guy but I suggest you try the 100p or 500p games instead at least you get a pretty solid base of players hanging around until the end. You get a lot of newbie players that join a game just to get the points and others who are multi-accounts that get scared of being found out. It's been a problem since day one and there's nothing that can be done about it. Every game you join is a dice roll as to whether you're fighting people or computers.

    My other suggestion is get a bunch of people together and join a game, that way you can be relatively sure they're there to play.

    Okay, here's ANOTHER example of Forts not mattering anymore...with pictures.

    That picture shows what happened after the first attack by 5 men of an AI nation against 2 men with HIGH morale in a level 5 fort. As you can see, I lost 1 man and the AI lost NOTHING. OH, and both the morale of the 2 men was boosted using GM that was purchased AND the fort was built to level 5 with GM as well.

    THAT image shows what happened AFTER an hour and the second attack went in. NOBODY lost ANYTHING.

    I didn't bother making another image after the 3rd attack because the AI took the city along with what I suspect is now a level 5 fort for THEM. The reason I didn't bother making an image is because I sent in a report and I was FURIOUS. Why buy GM? Why build forts? They're useless right now, even against the AI!!!


    So, I had 56 infantry, 2 artillery, 2 Heavy tanks, 5 Cavalry in a level 5 fort and was attacked by 10 artillery firing from a road. I took damage to the fort and workshop and lost 1 artillery piece. I REMEMBER being inside a level 5 fort and firing artillery with impunity because the fort needed to be taken down before the ones inside being damaged. OH, and just to prove it was not a fluke. I also had 2 artillery inside another level 5 fort and had 3 artillery destroy both artillery pieces with no damage to the infantry and cavalry accompanying them. b78//+:cursing::cursing: