Gregory Rainsborough Posted March 3, 2018 Posted March 3, 2018 (edited) Hello all powerful devs, As you know we have a fair few port battles tomorrow (04/03/2018). I understand that multiflipping is perfectly valid as a tactic as we know but as stated in "Alts for port battle activities - BAN WARNING" the use of alts to generate hostility is not permitted. I hereby accuse Christendom of using his American alt, ChristendomToo to flip RSC ports in the Bahamas, namely Marsh Harbour and La Desconcida (and perhaps Walker's Cay as well). So in short - Christendom/ChristendomToo Russia/USA Bahamas/Grand Bahamas Generation of hostility with the purpose of flipping the port. Evidence A thread with him stating that he did it on the forums Edited March 3, 2018 by Gregory Rainsborough
Kawazz Posted March 3, 2018 Posted March 3, 2018 (edited) You need to read what the devs said: Quote Clarification. By abuse we mean directly generating hostility for the enemy by means of sinking or surrendering. I was there this morning. ChristendomToo is a USA player that was in hostility missions attacking A.I ships. That's not abuse. I can understand the salt but today was a great day for naval action. Edited March 3, 2018 by koiz 1
Sir Texas Sir Posted March 3, 2018 Posted March 3, 2018 Really? Your pretty sad. We had over 12 players (had to drop and make a battle fleet). We had 3 battles going at once at Marsh my group did two missions in time of the other two. The same was with Les Des. There was no Russians in the Bahamas so how is this alt using and how would grinding A Russian char gives us hostility on a US port. Mad flipped Walkers on there own as with the other nations. Suck it up butter cup you got 7 ports flipped cause of how you acted on the forums and in game. Hope you can defend the. @Ink I would like to report fails accusations of the posters . Not only for accusing @Christendom, but since my clan [CSA] was invlovled (we flipped Marsh Harbor and helped with La Desc. Since where is no proof of actually rules being broken he is falsely accusing us of cheating and should be punished accordinly per forum rules. 2
Gregory Rainsborough Posted March 3, 2018 Author Posted March 3, 2018 I'm not criticising the multiflip, I'm stating that his involvement in the multiflip was against the rules, not the multiflip itself.
Christendom Posted March 3, 2018 Posted March 3, 2018 Laugh. the salt is real. I do believe I am allowed to play multiple characters in different nations. My Russian character had zero interaction with my US character. The streams did not cross. I believe the theme behind the rule is that you're not supposed to sink or interfere with alts in hostility. Are you trying to assume my main character? Perhaps my US character is my main now. I'm offended. ~~ Hey @admin @Ink can we open tribunals against players who are trying to revenge troll? This gave me a good chuckle though. 4
Kawazz Posted March 3, 2018 Posted March 3, 2018 (edited) Just now, Gregory Rainsborough said: I'm not criticising the multiflip, I'm stating that his involvement in the multiflip was against the rules, not the multiflip itself. What rules are you making up here? Sounds like your backtracking. Edited March 3, 2018 by koiz
Gregory Rainsborough Posted March 3, 2018 Author Posted March 3, 2018 Really what I'm asking for is seeking clarification for whether or not alts are permitted to flip ports on behalf of someone else. So for instance, can I use my American alt to go and flip pirate ports etc?
Kawazz Posted March 3, 2018 Posted March 3, 2018 (edited) Just now, Gregory Rainsborough said: Really what I'm asking for is seeking clarification for whether or not alts are permitted to flip ports on behalf of someone else. So for instance, can I use my American alt to go and flip pirate ports etc? You missed all those pinned topics? Edited March 3, 2018 by koiz
Gregory Rainsborough Posted March 3, 2018 Author Posted March 3, 2018 1 minute ago, ScipioTortuga said: hey daz me! Sorry I meant to link the thread generally not you specifically. 1
Christendom Posted March 3, 2018 Posted March 3, 2018 from the rule thread - "Clarification. By abuse we mean directly generating hostility for the enemy by means of sinking or surrendering. " Do you have any visual proof of me doing this?
Gregory Rainsborough Posted March 3, 2018 Author Posted March 3, 2018 "generating hostility for the enemy by means of sinking" I'm sure there are logs that can confirm whether or not you attacked AI in the hostility mission.
Kawazz Posted March 3, 2018 Posted March 3, 2018 Just now, Gregory Rainsborough said: "generating hostility for the enemy by means of sinking" I'm sure there are logs that can confirm whether or not you attacked AI in the hostility mission. You do realize your the enemy right? Did you guys get any hostility? Wait I had no idea you guys were part of a multi-nation flip.... Oh wait...
Christendom Posted March 3, 2018 Posted March 3, 2018 Just now, Gregory Rainsborough said: "generating hostility for the enemy by means of sinking" I'm sure there are logs that can confirm whether or not you attacked AI in the hostility mission. He means sinking or surrendering the alt to gain hostility dope. lol Can I tribunal stupidity? 6
Gregory Rainsborough Posted March 3, 2018 Author Posted March 3, 2018 At least there will be clarification as I was in channel with others who thought that my interpretation of what was written was correct.
Kloothommel Posted March 3, 2018 Posted March 3, 2018 The post from admin about alts in hostility was about players sinking the alts to gain hostility. Nothing else. 4
Kawazz Posted March 3, 2018 Posted March 3, 2018 2 minutes ago, Gregory Rainsborough said: At least there will be clarification as I was in channel with others who thought that my interpretation of what was written was correct. Lies. You copied the title of the post "Alts for port battle activities - BAN WARNING" in your first post. You didn't even read it and used it to attack a nation and its players. Shame on you to blame it on your fellow captains.
victor Posted March 3, 2018 Posted March 3, 2018 2 minutes ago, Gregory Rainsborough said: At least there will be clarification as I was in channel with others who thought that my interpretation of what was written was correct. In claris non fit interpretatio.
Christendom Posted March 3, 2018 Posted March 3, 2018 Just now, victor said: In claris non fit interpretatio. I think greggybaby is the only guy here who needed clarification. 2
Gregory Rainsborough Posted March 3, 2018 Author Posted March 3, 2018 GB hasn't the playerbase any more, at most we can defend 2 at most at any one time and you well know that. Any nation would be hard pressed to fill 6 PBs at any time now.
Batman Posted March 3, 2018 Posted March 3, 2018 4 minutes ago, Banished Privateer said: Git gud Gregory. Next time use prime time. Over a year ago Brits defended 6 PBs at the same time, as it was in our prime time. That was with the alliance system in place, you know that.
Gregory Rainsborough Posted March 3, 2018 Author Posted March 3, 2018 (edited) Since I started GB has struggled to get 3 max. Hell if these guys would fight us 1v1 they'd have lost every single time but of course, that's why they multiflipped. Edited March 3, 2018 by Gregory Rainsborough
Batman Posted March 3, 2018 Posted March 3, 2018 8 minutes ago, Banished Privateer said: You remember how many US or Dutch came to help? Nah, I honestly don't. Maybe @amplify remembers?
Gregory Rainsborough Posted March 3, 2018 Author Posted March 3, 2018 3 minutes ago, Banished Privateer said: Fighting 1v1 and getting screened out by 20-30 ships, right. Ah, and fighting in 11-14 timer, sure. If you feel strong, we can setup 1v1 in Little Harbour, no screening, no multiflipping. Oh noes, someone else is jumping on the bandwagon.
Recommended Posts