Fenix Serverpact (discussion (For general Questions))
Re: Fenix Serverpact (discussion (For general Questions))
"Proposed to the Following guilds and leaders - cutoff to join Pact is at least 20 members."
Re: Fenix Serverpact (discussion (For general Questions))
whats say a guild wants to work with a guild outside of said pact, can that said guild be noted as a legitimate pact? and be given same protection rights?
Re: Fenix Serverpact (discussion (For general Questions))
This Agreement shall become binding and effective 3 days after the top five Guilds (by membership) have signed it. Any additional guilds shall have one week after the Agreement becomes effective to sign it - to sign on, a guild must have at least 20 members. Any guild that fails to sign during his period is not covered by the Agreement and cannot become covered until the Agreement is up for re-evaluation upon expiration.
^^Why?##
^^Why?##
Re: Fenix Serverpact (discussion (For general Questions))
You know there is an edit button?
Give me a minute, I'm good. Give me an hour, I'm great. Give me six months, I'm unbeatable.
Re: Fenix Serverpact (discussion (For general Questions))
I assume you're asking why we didn't give small guilds an unlimited amount of time to sign on to the pact? Two reasons: 1) To avoid having last-minute sign-ons by guilds that are in the midst of being attacked in an effort to evade the attack. And 2) to encourage people to take this seriously and give it a try from the beginning. Notwithstanding Italius's moronic ramblings on other threads, this is a pretty good agreement that balances flexibility, common-sense rules, and common-sense enforcement as best as possible given it's a negotiated document among hostile guilds with very different priorities. It benefits smaller guilds by giving them a chance to blob and grow their fleets instead of being constantly farmed and unable to blob. It benefits larger guilds by ensuring they can go to war without some other guild interfering -- which is what caused the server stasis everyone hated, where we'd have these massive blob standoffs for years at a time with no action. It's possible we will all conclude this whole effort was a waste of time, and go back to farming the heck out of non top 5 guilds and getting into massive blob standoffs between and among the top 5 guilds. Only time will tell.Evil Dude wrote:This Agreement shall become binding and effective 3 days after the top five Guilds (by membership) have signed it. Any additional guilds shall have one week after the Agreement becomes effective to sign it - to sign on, a guild must have at least 20 members. Any guild that fails to sign during his period is not covered by the Agreement and cannot become covered until the Agreement is up for re-evaluation upon expiration.
^^Why?##
I recognize I've taken a risk here responding to a question as if someone actually cared about the answer. These forums truly are just a magnet for trolls, I get that. But I thought I'd give it a shot.
-
- Junior Member
- Posts: 25
- Joined: Sun 28 Jun, 2009 01:21
- Guild: TE
- Galaxy: Fenix
Re: Fenix Serverpact (discussion (For general Questions))
My 9 year old has a question: "Why would you tell someone you were going to attack them in a space war game?"Vladimirov wrote:Proposal on the future of Fenix (Diabetic Guilds of Fenix)
War Declarations
Declaration Guidelines
War declarations must be made a minimum of 12 hours before the attacking guild makes an attack on the target blob.
Re: Fenix Serverpact (discussion (For general Questions))
if guilds dont sign its a free for all
if guilds not at war its a free for all?
if thats the case then whats the bloody point of all this?(outside of the top 5) why not instead of power hording why not actually attack someone your own size in the first place? no? just sit on the side lines and jump in when it suites you... then hold yourself as a savior later for said hard work on pacts etc.etc.etc.
if guilds not at war its a free for all?
if thats the case then whats the bloody point of all this?(outside of the top 5) why not instead of power hording why not actually attack someone your own size in the first place? no? just sit on the side lines and jump in when it suites you... then hold yourself as a savior later for said hard work on pacts etc.etc.etc.
Re: Fenix Serverpact (discussion (For general Questions))
Just a reminder for Fate. You have a week remaining to implement a solution as you are still over 7 billion in fleet.
"No guild should exceed 7 Billion fleet. If this happens a guild has to go to war, split, or find another way to drop below the 7B maximum. Once a guild hits 7 billion fleet, it has 2 weeks to implement a solution."
"No guild should exceed 7 Billion fleet. If this happens a guild has to go to war, split, or find another way to drop below the 7B maximum. Once a guild hits 7 billion fleet, it has 2 weeks to implement a solution."
Give me a minute, I'm good. Give me an hour, I'm great. Give me six months, I'm unbeatable.
Re: Fenix Serverpact (discussion (For general Questions))
Some of the objections brought up have been legitimate. In a document like this, everything needs to be specified and explained. Regardless of that, I have another clarification.
If I am incorrect please tell me so, but at the same time tell me why there are loopholes incorporated into the pact.
I'm going to give it the benefit of the doubt and assume it means you can't make any big hits on the involved guilds while at war, I.e. no blob attacks/undeclared war. Otherwise you'd be giving whatever guild was at war essentially permanent immunity from attack. Meaning if a war is faked, or simply uneventful, they gain major advantage by losing little to no fleet. Simply repeat another "war" over and over and you have an immunity.In a declared war, only the defending guild or guilds specified in the war declaration can be attacked.
The guilds engaged in a war are considered off limit for other guilds.
If I am incorrect please tell me so, but at the same time tell me why there are loopholes incorporated into the pact.
Re: Fenix Serverpact (discussion (For general Questions))
Here is an idea
The guilds can keep the pact, we are not interested but if they really want to keep the server alive then they really should be looking after the smaller guilds where new players start out instead of seeing them as farms. This is one of the reasons players leave, they see no chance of growing and building any fleet because some clown with 100+ mil in fleet comes and derbs all they have and then they lose interest and end up quitting.
If you really want to save the server then write into the pact that smaller guilds will not be attacked until they reach 250 to 500 mil in fleet and have a chance to have grown and are an actual match.
The guilds can keep the pact, we are not interested but if they really want to keep the server alive then they really should be looking after the smaller guilds where new players start out instead of seeing them as farms. This is one of the reasons players leave, they see no chance of growing and building any fleet because some clown with 100+ mil in fleet comes and derbs all they have and then they lose interest and end up quitting.
If you really want to save the server then write into the pact that smaller guilds will not be attacked until they reach 250 to 500 mil in fleet and have a chance to have grown and are an actual match.
Re: Fenix Serverpact (discussion (For general Questions))
Don't remind them bro. That way it will be easier to super-blob them with Noise and crush them after they violate their own ridiculous pact.Kakarot wrote:Just a reminder for Fate. You have a week remaining to implement a solution as you are still over 7 billion in fleet.
"No guild should exceed 7 Billion fleet. If this happens a guild has to go to war, split, or find another way to drop below the 7B maximum. Once a guild hits 7 billion fleet, it has 2 weeks to implement a solution."
Then again, someone will just hit the "Edit" button and add stuff in and call us all crazy for thinking it wasn't there. The oldest trick in the book.
Re: Fenix Serverpact (discussion (For general Questions))
Regarding sorrow's question:
Actually, that part of the pact means guilds in war are completely DNH as to other guilds. No hits on them of any kind (except probably scout kills). I asked yarilo this very question a couple of days ago and he thought the same thing. Given that noise and SL declared war before the pact was even in effect, I doubt they read it differently.
I had not appreciated the extent to which that could be abused until now. If this pact is renewed, we will need to address that.
Actually, that part of the pact means guilds in war are completely DNH as to other guilds. No hits on them of any kind (except probably scout kills). I asked yarilo this very question a couple of days ago and he thought the same thing. Given that noise and SL declared war before the pact was even in effect, I doubt they read it differently.
I had not appreciated the extent to which that could be abused until now. If this pact is renewed, we will need to address that.
Re: Fenix Serverpact (discussion (For general Questions))
The entire pact is meaningless. It's already been violated several times and the pact contains no language for recourse or remediation. This only serves to provide the illusion of a fair playing field while FATE does as they please.
Last edited by UniDyne on Fri 03 May, 2013 06:00, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Fenix Serverpact (discussion (For general Questions))
Where has it been violated?
Give me a minute, I'm good. Give me an hour, I'm great. Give me six months, I'm unbeatable.
Re: Fenix Serverpact (discussion (For general Questions))
I've seen a few hits with Fate and DMTNT on the ticker but it didn't suggest a blob crash.
And there hasn't been a significant drop in your fleet count.
Last drop was 4,109,300 and that was today. That looks like a couple of accounts have been hit. That to me looks like an op more than a crash. But I would like to be proven wrong.
And there hasn't been a significant drop in your fleet count.
Last drop was 4,109,300 and that was today. That looks like a couple of accounts have been hit. That to me looks like an op more than a crash. But I would like to be proven wrong.
Give me a minute, I'm good. Give me an hour, I'm great. Give me six months, I'm unbeatable.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests