~TNE~ Announcement - FEAR,RESPECT, HONOR... your dead! (INW 2 & 3)

DeletedUser

Guest
The old merging/gifting rules required a TW Ticket or wait 120 days before internal noble. That has now gone away under the new rules.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
daftwager said:
The old merging/gifting rules required a TW Ticket or wait 120 days before internal noble. That has now gone away under the new rules.
Click to expand...

Yes. but dont' be surprised to see them state that any account that has been sat for more than 120 days will be banned.

they need to find a way to kill off worlds. olds worlds suck up resources and pay out less than new worlds.
 

DeletedUser23324

Guest
Arghos said:
Yes. but dont' be surprised to see them state that any account that has been sat for more than 120 days will be banned.

they need to find a way to kill off worlds. olds worlds suck up resources and pay out less than new worlds.
Click to expand...

Makes them allot of money still...
 

DUMBUMCLUM

Guest
Arghos said:
Yes. but dont' be surprised to see them state that any account that has been sat for more than 120 days will be banned.

they need to find a way to kill off worlds. olds worlds suck up resources and pay out less than new worlds.
Click to expand...

if all of those people in tribes ranked under 100 would just give up already they would be doing the world a favour. us players would have less random 200 point villages scattered everywhere and TW would be closer to shutting down the world.
 

Dunkywunky

Guest
DUMBUMCLUM said:
if all of those people in tribes ranked under 100 would just give up already they would be doing the world a favour. us players would have less random 200 point villages scattered everywhere and TW would be closer to shutting down the world.
Click to expand...

You want the world to end coz i dont im having fun
 

DUMBUMCLUM

Guest
well, its not that, i just want things to be simpler. there is just too many sides right now and if things were just 2 or 3 family tribes fighting against eachother things would be simple and easy to keep track of. thats pretty much how world 1 2 and 3 are going.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Well lets wait and see, with the way alliances are set up, theres bound to be a clash of the giants eventually.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Netflame said:
Well lets wait and see, with the way alliances are set up, theres bound to be a clash of the giants eventually.
Click to expand...

Two of the top 3 are hugging.

TSE won't hug.

so there you go.

there needs to be a 4th power to rise. and change things.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
spam cat said:
The whole point is they are not permas. If a player is leaving for a long time then a player is leaving for a long time.
Click to expand...

Not if it's longer than 3 months. Technically, the account is supposed to be banned and can only be retrieved by the original owner.

Sorry to bust your bubble.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
RamPag3 said:
Not if it's longer than 3 months. Technically, the account is supposed to be banned and can only be retrieved by the original owner.

Sorry to bust your bubble.
Click to expand...

Can you tell me where that rule is written? I am not trying to be argumentative, I am just suggesting that the rule be clear and be consistently applied. If its 3 months, fine. Implement the rule going forward and give us the time to make sure all tribes have the time to change what we are currently doing. Like:

Perma sit = > 3 months.

exceptions = documented military service, health, school, etc.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
RamPag3 said:
It's not hard to prove. Soon there will be a tool for the admins to find perma sat accounts much easier. Probably will see it in TW 5.0 (which is on its way...so I suggest you drop those perma sat accounts before you get subtracted villages :D)
Click to expand...

we are allowed to gift the perma sat villages away right, that is what i am doing with mine.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
daftwager said:
Can you tell me where that rule is written? I am not trying to be argumentative, I am just suggesting that the rule be clear and be consistently applied. If its 3 months, fine. Implement the rule going forward and give us the time to make sure all tribes have the time to change what we are currently doing. Like:

Perma sit = > 3 months.

exceptions = documented military service, health, school, etc.
Click to expand...

Daftwager...the rule was clearly explained here

Also - there is an annoucement on the front page that says more than 2 months. Depending on the circumstances, it's 2-3 months. Logging in for a day for a few hours won't break up a permasit either because someone else is playing your account for the large majority, which is the definition of a multi account.

Gifting perma sat villages are ok as one is expected to wait to see if someone would return before being legally able to gift the villages.
 

DeletedUser28764

Guest
Arghos said:
Two of the top 3 are hugging.

TSE won't hug.

so there you go.

there needs to be a 4th power to rise. and change things.
Click to expand...

How is this hugging? Those two have already long lasting, good relations BEFORE they got to that spot in the ranking.. Why would they end their alliance now, since it has worked for them?
 

DeletedUser

Guest
RamPag3 said:
Daftwager...the rule was clearly explained here

Also - there is an annoucement on the front page that says more than 2 months. Depending on the circumstances, it's 2-3 months. Logging in for a day for a few hours won't break up a permasit either because someone else is playing your account for the large majority, which is the definition of a multi account.

Gifting perma sat villages are ok as one is expected to wait to see if someone would return before being legally able to gift the villages.
Click to expand...

I clicked your link rampag and emboldened a part out of what i read.

'Multi accouting:
A player has an account on a game world. He then asks a friend to create an account also and to set him as sitter right away. The player now plays both his own account and the account of his friend permanently. This is nothing other than multi accounting and will be treated that way. Both accounts will be banned.

A player decides to quit the game and sets a sitter with the words "do whatever you want with the account". The sitter decides to just keep the account and plays it as a second account. This is also nothing other than multi accounting and will be treated that way. Both accounts will be banned.

A players serves in the US military and is deployed abroad for 6 months. He leaves a sitter in charge to play the account until he gets back. The sitter plays the account for the 6 months in the interest of the account. The player returns 6 months later and takes back his account.
In this case sitting has been done for a very long time, but this is exactly what account sitting is for, just a very intense case. It is perfectly fine to do this.
(This example and the one before show why we cannot give a time frame for what is considered multi accounting. It becomes illegal when it becomes clear that the account owner will not return to the game and that the account by that becomes the sitters "second" account.)'


Rules state that if someone has to go for some reason for a period of time, and they can give an explanation why, and give an approximation of how long they'll be gone, it's well within the rules for them not to lose their account.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
argyle1978 said:
How is this hugging? Those two have already long lasting, good relations BEFORE they got to that spot in the ranking.. Why would they end their alliance now, since it has worked for them?
Click to expand...

Name a major war that either of them have been engaged in ?

Who are their major enemies?


Simply put, If they won't attack other top 10 tribes or each other, its a HUG.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Dazrield said:
I clicked your link rampag and emboldened a part out of what i read.

'Multi accouting:
A player has an account on a game world. He then asks a friend to create an account also and to set him as sitter right away. The player now plays both his own account and the account of his friend permanently. This is nothing other than multi accounting and will be treated that way. Both accounts will be banned.

A player decides to quit the game and sets a sitter with the words "do whatever you want with the account". The sitter decides to just keep the account and plays it as a second account. This is also nothing other than multi accounting and will be treated that way. Both accounts will be banned.

A players serves in the US military and is deployed abroad for 6 months. He leaves a sitter in charge to play the account until he gets back. The sitter plays the account for the 6 months in the interest of the account. The player returns 6 months later and takes back his account.
In this case sitting has been done for a very long time, but this is exactly what account sitting is for, just a very intense case. It is perfectly fine to do this.
(This example and the one before show why we cannot give a time frame for what is considered multi accounting. It becomes illegal when it becomes clear that the account owner will not return to the game and that the account by that becomes the sitters "second" account.)'


Rules state that if someone has to go for some reason for a period of time, and they can give an explanation why, and give an approximation of how long they'll be gone, it's well within the rules for them not to lose their account.
Click to expand...

Why are we discussing this here again?
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Arghos said:
Two of the top 3 are hugging.

TSE won't hug.

so there you go.

there needs to be a 4th power to rise. and change things.
Click to expand...

dang straight we wont, besides war has made us grow ive already grown by around 70k off our wars
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Dazrield, I've had many discussions with the admins about that change in the rule and I feel that the vast majority of us do not think that is ok. As I said, I can always double check that with hoodoo herself, but that rule is just so iffy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top