That's going outside the realm of the game to have two accounts. How can you even compare that with what I did? I clicked a button available to me in the game, it's no different to clicking the button that upgrades an OP into a radar OP, or a gate. There was a button in the game, and I clicked it at an opportune time to save our armies that otherwise would have died to a bug.

Yet it seems pressing this button at this particular time is considered cheating... why? Because the admin said so, that's why. This whim is what is wrong with the situation. If a game mechanic is broken to the point that simply using one of the interface buttons is cheating, I would think that it should be fixed.

Also, if WDK got their army back, don't forget that we not only deserve compensation for our armies that got hit with the nukes, but Pixy deserves compensation for her army that died as well.

As for you Routhy, bugs are not my fault, I didn't make a bug... but it's in the game. I should not be expected to deprive myself of a tactical maneuver that has been in the game for more than a year just because there is not enough motivation to fix it.

If the bug is not a big deal enough to be fixed after a year, no one should be punished for it's use. Especially when the mere opportunity for the 'abuse' was due to a previous bug caused by the other team.

If that bug was fixed, we wouldn't have kicked Pixy, and there would be no issue... yet I am banned. Makes no sense, and merely calling my arguments ignorance without joining in the discussion makes you look like a biased bystander hurling epithets from the uninformed booth.

I were planning on staying out of this debate. But seriously Kane, blaming the admins when everyone but you think you should have a WAY longer ban?

I know others who have been banned for it with no complaints as they understood that they abused a feature in the game. There is a way to make outposts on water, just as there is a option to save GIFT's army, but both of those are bannable, but if my memory ain't playing with me the op bug were perm ban. But you on the other hand complain about 6 hours?!

just got to ask, are you serious?

In my honest opinion, if a bug is not fixed or addressed in a certain time frame & is used by ALL when it suits them, dont cry when it is used upon you.

Just because it is there doesnt mean it should be used. But it is there & it is being used & we weren't the first. We are the ones who made it "grandioso" & thx to us the admin is putting it #1 on his to do list.

So dont be a "tadle tale" because someone did something you've done but better & you're mad cause it ruled. None of you should of ever done it in the 1st place.

Bugs should be fixed asap, in my opinion if something is there & it should not be, it might still be used. So fix it & if you leave it for too long (say an over Era), well, it just might be used in a war (P.S. this is a war game).

Peace!

Kevin is correct.

Makers of a game should not hold the players of the game accountable for utilizing IN GAME tactics available to them through no hacking or manipulation of the game code. It is perfectly acceptable to state the use of such a thing IS not the intention of the code, THEN, to immediately FIX the code.

It is an ill thing to punish a player for the errors of the makers.

On E2, long ago, this alliance kept spy trapping CAE armies by relocating to distant places and giving us the OP. At that time, spy time stayed in place, so they could lock is in, burn us, and whip us with far fewer members. They did this for days, until one day, the game was updated, and there was a change in the code to resolve this.

THIS is appropriate use of time -- though I'd argue one should not make changes once an era is in flight, at least you can correct clear coding errors in flight.

The admins should seriously reconsider what they've done here. Is it clearly outlined what Kevin did is a violation of the game in any way? Expressly written? Or is this just whim to hold the player to account for an error Michael and coders made?

Are we even sure they made it? As it has existed for some time, perhaps the game is designed to function precisely so? Banning any player for using the in game mechanics for NOT violating something EXPRESSLY written in as cheating in spite of code limits -- i.e. multiplaying -- is bad practice.

It's ridiculous for it to cross all gaming worlds.

If he did break the rules on E1, he didn't do so anywhere else.

I've seen Kane do it loads of time now he's friends are doing it.. surprising

Look at what i say, read the post, re-read it if needed, some other bugs which can be done without changing game mechanics or coding give PERMANENT ban, and many players think that should be the punishment for this, and for you guys to complain about 6 hours is just ridiculous.

Conversely, Simmen, read what you've seen offered.

If the game allows a thing, and doesn't EXPRESSLY state doing a thing it allows as against the rules, it ought not be considered so. It's one thing not to code against multiplayers as that's nearly impossible and to make a rule that you violate the game by exploiting it.

It's another thing to have such basic, simple code left unfixed, then to ban someone for using it, when it is not, as I can tell, listed anywhere in game as a violation of the rules.

Here's how easy it is to fix.

On E4, right now, they just changed the boost cool down so each boost is cut in half. It's approximately that simple. This is a tick based game. A the start of tick is army on a 0, 1 or 2 piece of property. 0 = space. 1 = friendly/owned. 2 = enemy/neutral. If 2, attack. It's a simple table and simple loop at the start of each tick.

I could literally code it in 10 minutes assuming this is a PHP/MySQL game under the Flash flash.

Fix the game if this is a violation. Write a specific, clear, in game rule which states EXACTLY what you can not do in game, though the code allows, until you fix the code. The problem with Battle Dawn is the subjectivity of rulings.

Even YOU state this is an issue.

Even you acknowledge another in game exploit they don't like may be a perma ban while Kevin got 6. Even you recognize the problem with subjective rulings. You're only now realizing it.

I'm glad to help .

Kane, according to you, the "spy glitch" has been in the game for over 6 months now too, so does that mean that now this is how spies work? If so, then you should stop complaining about being spy attacked because you don't think it should have happened because its not how it used to be. But the fact is, it has been this way for month and I was only using the in game mechanics that were available to me. Using my spy when I did is "no different to clicking the button that upgrades an OP into a radar OP, or a gate"

If you ask me, your bug started all of this. The fact that you can add spy protection WHILE the tick is turning, yet I cannot spy attack you while it turns is also a glitch. If executed properly it means that spies are completely useless because the defender has an inherent advantage of being able to add spy protection before the attack can execute his spy attacks. Or is that just a mechanic of the game that is available to you as well and therefore shouldn't be cheating? If you say it is, then I refer you to my first paragraph in this post that by that logic my spy executing when it did and interacting with your spy protection the way it did is just the way that the game is programmed and you just have to deal with that fact.

~Darth Blitz

Thank you for your help, but you know just as well as me that Kane perfectly well knew that he were abusing a game mechanics not just using it

that is why he tried to tell the enemy alliances that he kicked juno because she were a spy, when he were laughed right in he's face for that excuse, he just admitted it with the great argument "you started it".

I do as you say agree that the bug is to be fixed, and as soon as possible. But complaining about the admins for 6 tick ban for abusing a game bug is on the borderline to where i must ask "are you serious?"

I never said I kicked Ping because she was a spy, making that up just makes you look more out of touch.

I didn't add protection before you could spy attack, I was faster than you, you could have spied at the same time I did... but I was faster, and due to the bug with how protection worked you still spied us.

I couldn't attack at the same time you could because on my screen the op was still owned by us, only after I refreshed was the op owned by you, allowing my spy to attack you. And if you want to call that "bug" a real bug that is not just part of the game even though it hasn't been fixed yet, then stop insisting that what you didn't wasn't a bug because both are the situation. Both are not meant to work the way they do, but you insist that yours is a legitimate strategy and that mine is a glitch. Its time that you end your hypocrisy and decide whether both are glitches, which means you abused your glitch, or both are perfectly usable game mechanics, in which case stop complaining that I spy attacked you faster than you could put enough protection on your op.

~Darth Blitz