Dooms Day Defenders Take Over

[Lammalord]

?!?!?

i log on to find myself in the allaince named Dooms Day Defenders 2 yet im pretty dam sure that noone got onto my account and i wasnt there the day before? what happened.. Emi i dont care if you dont like how active players decided to take over an inactive allaince though a hostile takeover, but it happened. and like it or not were all okay with it. if Foo wants his own allaince he has all the power to make his own. but going to you? and for what.. so you can force all our accounts into another allaince, force a name change without telling us, then re-create DDD so that you can give Foo back the leadership?

hey Emi if you dont want leadership of allainces to switch there is an easy way to simply make it eaither not possible at all or only by the choice of the current leader.. dont leave the option of Mutiny avaible.. then create a fake allaince cause you feal sorry for the booted allaince leader and let him back into his alliance while switching the name of the old one..

~DDD Forever~ the Real DDD (oh wait i cant say that anymore right?)

[Lammalord]

Emi, if you think this is about kicking WoW out of DDD  its not, simply place him back in, kicking him was a complete accident and if it could be helped we would let him back into the allaince.. not to mention of WoW ever did start to play again.. we would still vote him leader, its his allaince.

[CrimsonSmear]

i find this behaviour (and the allowing of this behavior) appaulling. what happened to DDD was well within the mechanics of the game, including the ejection of any player by the leader (not excluding WoW). renaming the alliance because someone else was upset, was a gross abuse of power and totally uncalled for.

what can i expect next... upsetting the wrong person and finding my account deleted?

[Arbies]

In game power struggles are not solved by someone exercising admin rights.

Admin should exercise kick/ban for violating TOS, fixing bugs, extending the game, etc. 

I like this game, especially the work that went into creating the formulas.  Sir Emi has created an amazing game.  And I have read around 70 - 80 % of the forums, the guide, visited alliance websites, and have not seen this abuse before.

It seems that someone has pulled off a Trojan Horse, and someone has gone to admin rights to fix it.  Bad policy, let the ingame mechanics work themselves out.

I just don't want vote everyday, put time, energy and a gold account, to find out someone can go whine to the admin and send me down the road.  Waste of my time.  I would like the game put back the way it was and let the alliance work itself out.  Knowing that following the rules, lets one play their game as they learn it.

Otherwise post in the TOS, admin staff are subject to rewrite your alliance anytime anyone comes whining to them, or maybe even rewrite your account or delete it.   Not a slippery slope I want to play in.

[MALICE]

This is bull, if an alliance mutinied they must have done it for a reason, to go back and change the name of the alliance to DDD2 is low. Bravo, just another thing people can get really angry with. Emi, in doing this you could risk losing some really great players, WoW is always going to be the leader of DDD, but until the day he does actually come back - If ever - The leadership should stay with whoever was rightfully voted.

[lostedchylde]

the mutiny shouldn't be a matter for admin. if commanders pull a coup d'tat its strictly a game play matter not game rules, since mutinies are allowed by the rules and mechanics of the game. no rules were broken and the game not subverted so......... im not saying i condone or support mutinies in general, but they are allowed and part of the game.

[FTP]

In a game such as this there are many possibility. Things can be used for different purposes, which leads to tactic. But some possibilities are not meant to be there, some buttons have designed purpose, but can be used for other things.

Anyone here can remember the bug that if you clicked on the attack button twice before you did an encounter you would get paid out twice..... Or when the cost calculator made it possible you could do missions with no ships at all and the cost calculator would block out almost all enemy fleets. And it still gave you a huge reward. I could go on by naming examples like this. All examples of possibility's that this game had, but were not meant for this use.

In my opinion this option to vote for your leader was designed so that if a leader would want to leave you could get another leader, that if your leader went inactive you could get another leader, if your leader made bad calls you could get another leader or if you as alliance did not agree with your leader you could get another leader.

Now I ask you do you think this possibility to vote was created so that when one alliance wishes to take over another, just to get rid of another player from that alliance, to kick their normal leader out of his own alliance. They could ask to join and make a planned takeover of the alliance to achieve this single goal? In my opinion this was not were the button was made for and this is why I support this change. I think just like in my examples of the bugs this is not the purpose of the votes.

Those members from elites were not even a week in DDD, some less than a day. And Lamma why you wanted this? Don’t tell me you had another reason than to kick FOO out to piss him off and get yourself in DDD. I doubt you were even seriously planning to play.



All these angry reactions are because you got such a brilliant idea on the edges of what was possible, but still a brilliant plan to max out in one day using a loophole that is possible is just as bad as this.

FTP

Good Job Sir Emi

PS: Flame me if you like, you can blacken me, you can hate me but you can never change me.

[CrimsonSmear]

in your self-righteous attempt to condone the action implimented, you have taken the cause leading to the outcome out of context. the bugs you have attempted to site for justification were serious errors in coding and greatly affected gameplay. what has happened to the alliance is a possible outcome on any ship (sea or space). as for who was ejected, as irrelivant as it is, you did suggest inactive players and some of them were. but who do you think you are, as you are not in this alliance. in reality, it's not any of your business.

[FTP]

By posting anything in a general discussion on the forums, you make it a general topic. And there for it is my business. If you guys did not want people outside of your own alliance to discuss these matters you shouldn’t have made a post about it.

Second if two countries in the world have a problem, do you think the other countries sit back and do nothing. Just look to anything. Even the Danish comics about Muslims were discussed by allot of countries and you say it’s none of their business. If things happens in other alliances especially if Lammalord makes a post about it to celebrate how he tricked ABI, I do have an opinion about it and it is my business.

And for your example that this good happen anywhere on a ship. Let’s see we have our ship which is from country A, then some people from country B get on the ship and just throw overboard the people of A and then claim the ship. This is just stealing the ship. Only now it’s the entire country that gets stolen. I doubt that would be something you would want in the game as what you reach with this you gain that alliance name. Except that there would be no reason to do this.

Let me ask you why did you do it? I suppose because you were asked to.

And where did I take the cause leading to the outcome out of context I just said how I observed what happened.

And as last I referred to the bugs to get a good example that a possibility in a game does not automatically mean it should be allowed to be used. It is common to use extreme examples to make your point.

[lostedchylde]

yeah, but it is also a leaders responsibility to think about who she is letting in the alliance and why, to prevent infiltration and takeover. infiltration and takeover are a real part of wars cold and hot. i guess there are reasons on both viewpoints. as an alliance leader i always have in the back of my head the possibility of people who want to get rid of me and my alliance may try just such a maneuver. which is why there are people who i will never allow to join/rejoin my alliance.




                                                               

and i do believe that anything that happens in game affecting a whole alliance is of interest to and everyones business.

[FTP]

And to the example in real wars you can take over other countries

The it has the use of gaining their resources, their defenses etc. Here it is only to steal an alliance name. If someone would steal AoF from me they would only steal that name from me. They won’t steal anything else, no people, no resources nothing just a name. I could make a new alliance and get my members back.

This has no worth to the game, it is only a possibility to ruin someone else's day. As for me AoF, I made AoF and I would hate to lose it.

[Lammalord]

are you going to keep compareing this to 'the real world' just to let you know FTP this IS a game. and like it or not that mutnity chance WAS an option in the game.. and not something hidden that you had to do a dozen things to work or have a certain kind of internet speed..

the "push the botton twise" thing only worked with dial-up and the other one only worked when you had a certain kind of 10 fleets with a certain number of ships in each fleet designed in a certain way. they were not there and they were not obvious, the munity was obvious dont think because noone ever tried and was sucessful that its a loophole...

just like when lightseeker first started making 1 big ship rather than everyone elses "swarms" its not abuse, just something never tried before.. ABI should of watched who went into his allaince. and should of kept a weary eye on who to trust.. if i reamber right it was YOU that told me you warned ABI not to trust nightshadow.. it was his fault for trusting someone who was obviously schemeing something... it wasnt even well hidden all players sympathetic to one person joining an allaince as he does? people whom have no loyaty to you??



And off that, thanks for everyones support in this matter, im not used to everyone actally agreeing with me, useally im the one lone voice against the crowds of millions.. this time emi, the tide has turned.

[lostedchylde]

as FTP says " Here it is only to steal an alliance name. If someone would steal AoF from me they would only steal that name from me."
the name DDD was taken fair and square, it should remain with those who took it, and the other alliance should be DDD2.

                                                                                                           

[FTP]

Lamma I was so looking forward to your response. Well first things first.

First accusation - If you read carefully I have not done a single comparison to the real world in my first post. I think crimsom smear got the real world in with his ships example and losted used a real world example and I merely defended my point against it. So sorry this is a game but if I would shoot down all arguments comparison with the real world you would blame me for dodging arguments.

And for hidden options or not, the tinymen wasn’t hidden but it got fixed as it wasn’t supposed to be like that. When the boarding became better, it got scaled down because it was not supposed to be that good. And I tried the multiple reward thingy on my high-speed ADSL, it worked as well ;) nothing to do with dial up.

Of course I do not say it is a bad thing or that it is not supposed to work like that, merely that I think it's not supposed to work like that and that I think it’s a bad thing. And from Emi's actions supporting my opinion I assume he agrees with this. Same as the recent topics has been opened for people who wish the mass mission boarding back.

Yes ABI asked me if nighty would ever do such thing, and I told him you did never know with Nighty. And that when nighty gives you his word, it doesn’t mean anything because nighty lies when it’s good for him. You cannot blame me for saying this looking at what happened between me and nighty this round.

EDIT:
@losted, my argument was that stealing a name serves no purpose except to piss off others

[blakranger51]

Actually over half the accounts were under control of NightShadow, most of them are his alts or accounts he can control.
Silent Assassin, Exile, jgcampbell300 to name a few accounts he has control of

Again I put forward the request to emi to end the alternate abuse in this game, this isn't the first problem we've had with alts and it won't be the last either.