Disputes Thread

[Hercules]

1. Because Templars moved last on the first turn of the war, therefore Templars move last on all subsequent turns.

That's the bit I question because the game went down and the civstats record of actually who did play last, was lost.

[sooooo]

FWIW Krill's second point is correct, I quote myself:

Templars' only login last turn was after the Imperio logins and Imperio did not login after the templar moves.

... RB did detect Imperio moving units in their logins

Civstats doesn't show this anymore but it is what happened.

But if both Imperio and Templars both want to swap over then I see no reason why they cannot. You two should probably sort it out quickly though

OK, but if I move between RB and Templars I will be doing double turn, becouse in last turn I had moved after Templars.

Well, Templars did double-move you the previous turn.

[Naldorinho]

Increible acabo de entrar en civistats y veo que RB captura dos ciudades a imperio con un NAP activo y un acuerdo de repartición del territorio. ¡Exijo una explicación immediata!

Llevo cientos de horas gastadas en el juego, con la diplomacia, con las traducciones, etc, para que ahora un equipo iluminado como RB se salte todas las normas éticas.

Espero una solución urgente. Si puede ser que alguno de los responsables me explique si tal situación es considerada legal.

En fin espero que se trate de un error o locura de sunrise089 porque de no ser asi supondrá mi retirada immediata del juego.

Naldorinho.

[Naldorinho]

Incredible I have just entered in civistats and see that RB captures two cities to empire with an active NAP and an agreement of distribution of the territory. I demand an explanation immediata!

I take hundreds of hours spent in the game, with the diplomacy, with the translations, etc, in order that now a team illuminated like RB jumps all the ethical procedure.

I wait for an urgent solution. If can be that someone of the persons in charge explains to me if such a situation is considered to be legal.

I hope that it is a question of a mistake or madness of sunrise089 because of not being like that it will suppose my retreat immediata of the game.

Naldorinho.

[Hercules]

I don't believe a word of it.

[conmcb25]

Ha Ha hilarious

If true it couldn't have happened to a "nicer" bunch of folks.

By the way oh Dons of Juan. That isn't a dispute. Its just another Banana Republic getting it right up the old poop shoot.

Enjoy

[Krill]

Incredible I have just entered in civistats and see that RB captures two cities to empire with an active NAP and an agreement of distribution of the territory. I demand an explanation immediata!

I take hundreds of hours spent in the game, with the diplomacy, with the translations, etc, in order that now a team illuminated like RB jumps all the ethical procedure.

I wait for an urgent solution. If can be that someone of the persons in charge explains to me if such a situation is considered to be legal.

I hope that it is a question of a mistake or madness of sunrise089 because of not being like that it will suppose my retreat immediata of the game.

Naldorinho.

Are you asking if RB cheated? Or are you asking if the attack was legal, ie does breaking an out of game NAP mean that the turn must be reloaded?

[Indiansmoke]

He is obviously saying that RB cheated by breaking an out of game NAP....while lame...i don't think there is any rule for that.....


Funny things is 2 turns ago he refused Education for free from us and instead gave RB mil trad for Education....go figure!

[Naldorinho]

Bueno chicos,

Yo juego este Democracy Game hace sólo 2 meses y no conozco exactamente cómo funcionan las reglas éticas ni cuales son los acuerdos sobre que se puede acrodar mediante diploacia y que no. Por esto, pido que alguién me diga si un acuerdo escrito de NAP + repartición del territorio se puede romper.

Yo llevo muchas horas gastadas en este juego, con la diplomacia y cerrando acuerdos para que ahora se tomen a la ligera. Para mi mantener esta partida me cuesta mucho esfuerzo y lo hago para que ustedes disfruten. Asi que si me dicen que todo lo pactado y escrito no sirve de nada o no vale nada seguiré jugando pero sin enviar ni un sólo mensaje más porque no le veo el sentido. Es lógico.

Cúal es el código ético en estos casos? Lo pregunto porque en el foro español estos movimientos son considerado no éticos.

[Naldorinho]

I play this Democracy Game only 2 months ago and do not know exactly how they work neither the ethical rules or which are the agreements on which it is possible acrodar by means of diploacia and that not. For this, I ask that anyone can tell me if NAP's written agreement + distribution of the territory can break.

I take many hours with the diplomacy and closing agreements in order that now they take carelessly. For my to support this game costs a lot of effort to me and I do it in order that you enjoy. This way that if they say to me that everything agreed and writing does not use as anything or does not cost anything I will continue playing but without not even one sends only message any more because I do not see the sense. It is logical.

Which is the code of ethics in these cases? I ask it because in the Spanish forum these movements are considered to be not ethical.

Thanks

[Krill]

RB didn't break any rules in orchestrating the attack. Out of game diplomacy is never binding in game.

The ethics of such a move are always debatable, but don't have any impact on the legality of such a move.

[ruff_hi]

Considering Imperio's past actions, it is our view that they aren't in a position to complain about the current situation. Here is a brief list of their past actions from our point of view:

1. During the cooldown period of our previous NAP they used spies to disconnect our sole source of metal. Regardless of whether espionage is considered an act of war, preventing us from training troops to prepare for the end of NAP broke the spirit of that agreement.

2. Our current agreement that included the NAP Imperio is talking about also included following clauses:
2.1. Imperio was supposed to trade us Gunpowder. Not only did they fail to do this, but they ignored our messages about it.
2.2. Imperio was supposed to join us in war against Templars. They broke both letter and spirit of this clause by delaying their attack for so long that Templars declared on them instead.

In addition to broken agreements with us, Imperio did several other things that discouraged good relations:

3. Imperio had negotiated a trade embargo against us, denying us critical military technologies.

4. Imperio had teamed with Templars to declare war on us.

5. During the war between Imperio+Templars and RB, Imperio sat on the sidelines doing nothing with their huge army and betrayed their allies as soon as it became clear who was winning the war. Not only did they sign a separate peace deal with us, they made a secret agreement to split the lands of their former ally with their enemy. This kind of behavior does not make them look trustworthy even if it was to our benefit in this case.

Because Imperio ignored their responsibilities from our most recent agreement, Team RB considers that agreement broken -- by them, not us -- and therefore void.

Our team takes diplomacy and our diplomatic commitments seriously. We expect the same from others. Given Imperio's history of working diplomatically (conspiring with other teams against us), secretly (using spies to destroy critical resources despite having a NAP with us), and actively (declaring war) against us, we feel that we have sufficient casus belli for our current actions. This was our last choice.

Team RB

[Naldorinho]

RB didn't break any rules in orchestrating the attack. Out of game diplomacy is never binding in game.

The ethics of such a move are always debatable, but don't have any impact on the legality of such a move.

Ok Krill thank you! I see that here you play different.

For us (in spanish forum) all of pacts signed are unbreakable and I was playing during these 2 month with this point of view. If here the diplomacy have not any importance for me is not necessary send messages or make pacts. Another time I will not waste my time.

If I had played konwing these conditions RB had never captured an imperio city It is the problem

Now I'm alone making imperio's movements and managing imperio's diplomacy, but in this conditions this game are not interesting for me. I was making a big effort to play the turns regulary and a lot of times I've lost the turn and for that sometime we can do all thing that we want to do (like attack in a concret turn or be quick with diplomcy answers) but never we make nothing or lie deliberate like RB has made.

Sorry I don't want to waste more time in a game where the diplomacy does not have importance

Thank you for all and sorry for all the problems that imperio causes to other teams during these months.

[Krill]

Please tell me that is a bad translation Naldo. Specifically all of it.

Are you withdrawing from teh game ie resigning, or just not going to play your turns?

[Naldorinho]

Jajaja, that's not a translation in this case that's my english

I want to retire me from of the game but I do not want to harm the other players.

In fact all this mess is because I did not know these conditions of game.

I will continue playing but already I warn that I will not lose the time sending neither messages or other diplomacy things. I will limit myself to the screen in game.

If I can find a substitute, better because it exceed me the time.

A shame is that Rb obtains so many advantage hereby