Player feeds enemey planets

[GrilledChicken]

Hello we Seraphim have a problem lately. We have a player called Ohy-Hazuzua attacking planets just to recall right afterwards( thats the conclusion we got due to him being able to play again soon after having attacked). I m not sure about any rules in gw restricting such behaviour but i think you agree with me that this cant go on like this. I ll ask players in the uef who played against him lately to post replays here proving this.

[Hawkei]

Yes, this is very irritating behaviour. I can't log onto FAF atm, but, when I do I will post any replays I have with this player.

[FunkOff]

The cybrans ceded territory to the uef in the last round of war to enable the uef to escape defeat by the aeons... not really sure how or if to fix this one

[Gorton]

I do not think those two topics are related at all. An Alliance between Cybran and UEF is within the rules of war, and a lone Seraphim giving free wins and % to a UEF is basically playing for the UEF as a Seraphim. That's cheating.

[FunkOff]

I do not think those two topics are related at all. An Alliance between Cybran and UEF is within the rules of war, and a lone Seraphim giving free wins and % to a UEF is basically playing for the UEF as a Seraphim. That's cheating.

No, they are exactly the same: Players intentionally recalled to cede territory.

[Gorton]

I do not think those two topics are related at all. An Alliance between Cybran and UEF is within the rules of war, and a lone Seraphim giving free wins and % to a UEF is basically playing for the UEF as a Seraphim. That's cheating.

No, they are exactly the same: Players intentionally recalled to cede territory.

An Alliance between Cybran and UEF

a lone Seraphim giving free wins and % to a UEF

very much the same, amazing reasoning

[Ato0theJ]

No need to argue; the point is that there needs to be some sort of measure to prevent people from feeding other factions, this is just beta testing so kinks are still getting worked out. Just because something happened last season doesn't men it shouldn't be seen as a significant issue for this one.

We need to brainstorm ideas on how to fix the problem of having people feed the other factions.

Honestly, I don't see a solution until there is an intelligence tab where people can make strategic decisions, like banning certain players from doing certain actions (creating squads, starting 1vXs to feed, etc)

[Hawkei]

These issues are entirely different. They are the same behaviour - but done with different motivations.

If a player (Cybran) is deliberately giving wins to a loosing faction (UEF) because they would otherwise be enslaved by a third party (Aeon). Then that Cybran player is working (with his commander's blessing) to achieve what is in the Cybran's best strategic interests. Even though he is actually seeding territory to his enemies.

If a player (Seraphim) is deliberately giving wins to another faction (UEF) - and this is done deliberately. Then this player is acting as to sabotage the efforts of his own faction. He is operating by a covert arrangement, and allowing the other faction to farm planets, credits and victories. Which is most likely done with a 'smurf' account. Not only this: But he could also conduct espionage on enemy chat. This is quite clearly cheating. A player's allegiance should be with the faction they joined. To do otherwise is entirely un-ethical.

[VEGER]

Ethics in war? That's kinda funny don't you think?

Perhaps we should really throw this wide open and have a way to do justice to "traitors" (which is what the Seraphim player appears to be). I'm not sure how one does that short of killing off the player permanently for the duration of that round of GW. That seems a bit like overkill for what is supposed to be a "fun game." Which I suppose is why "ethics" can perhaps come into a war simulation where there really are no rules and you can't necessarily count on the loyalty of all your troops. Treason in war = summary execution for a very specific reason. Namely it has to be severely discouraged due to the damage that can be done.

How that reality gets imported into GW, I do not know. No summary execution mechanism that will make any difference seems to built or buildable into the game. Especially with all the variations and combinations of treasonous behaviour one could engage in (e.g. going into a match and simply trying to win, how do you police that? Or exchanging key strategic information via private chat, and so on...).

It's a tough one.

[Hawkei]

Veger,

It is unethical in the sense that it is inappropriate within the context of a FAF community. You could argue that GW is a holistic warfare simulation. With the conclusion that espionage and sabotage activities are justified. If this were truly the case - we would be getting player with coding skills to hack into the server and delete enemy player accounts. Then we would install malware to corrupt their hard drives and render them incapable of playing FA. Which is clearly extreme and out of order (if not illegal).

Unlike real soldiers, who have sworn allegiance to a nation, the state or the crown. Players in FAF make allegiance simply by selecting the faction they wish to fight for. In the process of selecting a faction (even on a 'smurf' account) that player has made an obligation to fight for the faction they have chosen. So when a smurf account is being used for espionage and sabotage - they are dishonouring that commitment.

In selecting a faction for GW, players should be made to agree to those terms. If it is found by FAF administrators that those terms have been breached, the stipulated disciplinary action should be taken. If such actions are not taken faction members will be forced to resort to counter-intelligence techniques.