Official Territory War Bidding Rules

Options
1…34689…17

Comments

  • Psytrac - Dreamweaver
    Psytrac - Dreamweaver Posts: 2,488 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    Options
    I intenally didn't mention the faction to not start up the arguement again
    I'm a guy, not a woman, that is all
    "When you're on Team Bring it, every morning your feet hit the floor, the good lord says "good morning" and the devil says 'Oh **** they're up' " - Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson
    Are you on Team Bring it?
  • Slivaf - Dreamweaver
    Slivaf - Dreamweaver Posts: 2,106 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    Options
    Graviora - Dreamweaver wrote: »
    Aubree isn't banned as far as I know.

    Also, its pretty disgusting how everyone is trying to get Aubree banned when I don't see what she did wrong. Sure, Inversion leader was banned, yada yada, and he made a whole world chat drama about it. The personal attacks on Aubree are making the whole of Inversion look bad even though I have some good friends in Inversion (Sharky<3).

    Biased as you think it may be, Aubree is perfectly within the rules.

    Careful with those assumptions. <<

    Obviously a LOT of people disagree with the reason for alaxan's ban, I still don't get how ganking can be allowed, and while preventing a gank, and still attacking is, something smells really fishy about that, it is after all a territory war. =X < <

    EDIT: One more thing if aubree did in fact pass lead to attack next week... that is a really underhanded tactic, but I guess there is no rules stating that she can't; however, if she is expecting a ban, then they should be in more trouble for it... IF they do get a ban. =x ... That to me is avoiding the repercussion of her actions. In the past the whole faction suffers for the actions of their leader, so Equinox should be no different... IF she does get a ban. =x
    Ah, Mistakes are so easily made. ~ laura resnick

    What kind of message are you sending when you insult my intelligence? ~ Me ~ 5/29/2015 (Yes it is possible someone said this before just no idea who/where.)
  • Graviora - Dreamweaver
    Graviora - Dreamweaver Posts: 1,073 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    Options
    Slivaf - Dreamweaver wrote: »
    Careful with those assumptions. <<

    Obviously a LOT of people disagree with the reason for alaxan's ban, I still don't get how ganking can be allowed, and while preventing a gank, and still attacking is, something smells really fishy about that, it is after all a territory war. =X < <

    I never gave my opinion on the Alaxan ban. I just stated he made a lot of drama on world chat. I am upset at the personal attacks on Aubree.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • Slivaf - Dreamweaver
    Slivaf - Dreamweaver Posts: 2,106 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    Options
    Graviora - Dreamweaver wrote: »
    I never gave my opinion on the Alaxan ban. I just stated he made a lot of drama on world chat. I am upset at the personal attacks on Aubree.

    That is understandable about the aubree situation, but that statement is the precise assumption I am talking about, a lot of people are jumping in defense of alaxan, and his ban, therefore it could be any number of people starting up the so called drama over world chat.
    Ah, Mistakes are so easily made. ~ laura resnick

    What kind of message are you sending when you insult my intelligence? ~ Me ~ 5/29/2015 (Yes it is possible someone said this before just no idea who/where.)
  • tori2
    tori2 Posts: 40 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    Options
    Graviora - Dreamweaver wrote: »
    I never gave my opinion on the Alaxan ban. I just stated he made a lot of drama on world chat. I am upset at the personal attacks on Aubree.

    There is a huge amount of drama over the entire situation on world chat at the moment. Alaxan did step into the game briefly on an alt character. He voiced his concerns over the "fake bidding" taking place this weekend and hasn't been in game since. Personal attacks on Aubree? have you not been paying attention to world chat as Aubree, Goonz, Scobatank, Bodine and others have taken to personal attacks on Alaxan and Inversion. Simply because they stood up to Equinox's bullying and allied with Calamity? It's absurd on both parts.
  • Aubree - Dreamweaver
    Aubree - Dreamweaver Posts: 1,868 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    Options
    tori2 wrote: »
    There is a huge amount of drama over the entire situation on world chat at the moment. Alaxan did step into the game briefly on an alt character. He voiced his concerns over the "fake bidding" taking place this weekend and hasn't been in game since. Personal attacks on Aubree? have you not been paying attention to world chat as Aubree, Goonz, Scobatank, Bodine and others have taken to personal attacks on Alaxan and Inversion. Simply because they stood up to Equinox's bullying and allied with Calamity? It's absurd on both parts.

    Im glad to finally see someone admit you bid on an allied faction... hence the ban. Also I made 2 WC asking Alaxan to clarify his wc's on how we "got them out of the way". Nothing in them were personal from my end. EQ has always been there to support factions who honestly want to take land from Calamity. So got him out of the way for what?

    And I'm not banned.
  • tori2
    tori2 Posts: 40 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    Options
    Kantorek wrote: »
    Any behavior determined to be suspicious will require additional research were temporary bans maybe issued. Upon confirmation of the crime the faction leaders as well as the members involved will be banned at the discretion of the GM.

    I did just notice this in reviewing the rules again here. I would like to make note of it. Alaxan has been accused and is under suspicion. He has NOT been confirmed to have placed a false bid as of yet since it appears to still be under research status.
  • Slivaf - Dreamweaver
    Slivaf - Dreamweaver Posts: 2,106 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    Options
    Aubree - Dreamweaver wrote: »
    Im glad to finally see someone admit you bid on an allied faction... hence the ban. Also I made 2 WC asking Alaxan to clarify his wc's on how we "got them out of the way". Nothing in them were personal from my end. EQ has always been there to support factions who honestly want to take land from Calamity. So got him out of the way for what?

    And I'm not banned.
    O-o and who says that attacking an "allied" faction, is against the rules? ESPECIALLY if so many people seem to say/think that they showed up and really tried to take cala's land? EDiT: Ok so it IS in their rules, but meh wtf, they actually tried to win the fight, which should be fine damn it.... these rules need a kick in the *** and be more clear! =x ... Alliances break off all the damn time, anyone can attack an ally at any given time and easily attack with the full intent of winning. =x

    Attacking an allied faction, and not trying to win is against the rules, I for one, along with many others seem to think quite a bit different on your claim, about inversion attacking and not even showing up. =x

    Wow this has went way off topic... too many people jumping to the defense of others...

    I hope we can get this topic back... on topic and soon before they close it. =x

    So any clarification on those rules about the smaller factions attacking? Especially when a lot of factions still get rolled even when they meet those said requirements. =x
    Ah, Mistakes are so easily made. ~ laura resnick

    What kind of message are you sending when you insult my intelligence? ~ Me ~ 5/29/2015 (Yes it is possible someone said this before just no idea who/where.)
  • ShadowOfLife - Dreamweaver
    ShadowOfLife - Dreamweaver Posts: 85 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    Options
    Slivaf - Dreamweaver wrote: »
    O-o and who says that attacking an "allied" faction, is against the rules?


    Alliances

    Alliances are allowed in Territory Wars provided they are not bidding on each other others Territories.
  • Slivaf - Dreamweaver
    Slivaf - Dreamweaver Posts: 2,106 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    Options
    ShadowOfLife - Dreamweaver wrote: »
    Alliances

    Alliances are allowed in Territory Wars provided they are not bidding on each other others Territories.




    First page, take a look. Just saying that rules exists. b:bye

    Lol yea i went back and read it, but still... wtf... they actually tried taking land from them, which should be within the other stated rules. =x

    That alliance just seems to me like more of a on friendly terms with each other then full fledged allies. =x

    "The bids can only be made if the faction has a real intention of attacking and trying to win the territory. All bids must have a legitimate chance to win."

    In this case I do believe Inversion was well within their rights to attack calamity. =x
    Ah, Mistakes are so easily made. ~ laura resnick

    What kind of message are you sending when you insult my intelligence? ~ Me ~ 5/29/2015 (Yes it is possible someone said this before just no idea who/where.)
  • tori2
    tori2 Posts: 40 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    Options
    Aubree - Dreamweaver wrote: »
    Im glad to finally see someone admit you bid on an allied faction... hence the ban. Also I made 2 WC asking Alaxan to clarify his wc's on how we "got them out of the way". Nothing in them were personal from my end. EQ has always been there to support factions who honestly want to take land from Calamity. So got him out of the way for what?

    And I'm not banned.

    Equinox claims, substantially, to wanting a colorful map. Yet when we review the facts. Calamity has left the majority of the other factions on the server alone. Equinox was the faction that stepped up and took out the colorful factions in Raging Tide. Equinox was the faction to push a number of smaller factions off the map. Simply because they didn't wish to help the fight against Calamity. They wanted to TW. Equinox took a retreat and gave up all of their lands to hide behind smaller factions, make the map less colorful and rebuild their strength so they could fight Calamity.

    Equinox helped Vanquish? No. Vanquish obtained land and held on to it for dear life. They certainly didn't help them expand out. Equinox USED Vanquish as a meat shield. Equinox asked Inversion to do the same thing once or twice. Equinox bullied Dynasty when they went and took over Raging Tide area. (Side with us now or else Cala will get you) What's ironic about that, is Cala wasn't concerned about Dynasty even then until they sided with you. Now Dynasty is the new Vanquish. Holding on to one land for dear life, playing into the hands of Equinox who bullied them into submission to begin with. Equinox holds only one interest and that is Equinox. It lies to it's allies in order to get them to string along like puppets for it's growth and expansion. Equinox has continuously manipulated and abused the TW system and the entire Dreamweaver server, all the while pointing at Calamity as the big bad evil. At least Calamity has done what they've done with no real outside help. Equinox has relied on ganks for any real hope at a shot to win now for quite some time. It has used each and every one of it's "allies" that it's tossed aside for Equinox's own good, once finished with them.

    As for admitting a bid was placed on an allied faction? Yeah, rules were researched and we couldn't find anythin against it. The PWI wiki site was used even with none of these said rules (posted only yesterday tho apparently in place in hiding somewhere for 2yrs) bein found there. Inversion went into a fight with an allied faction. Inversion went into said fight with full out intent to take the land. Calamity went into it with full inntent to keep the land. It was not a preorganized fight. We dropped our friendship at the instance and went in as combatants against each other. Where else was Inversion meant to bid to expand out? That is the point of TW correct?
  • ShadowOfLife - Dreamweaver
    ShadowOfLife - Dreamweaver Posts: 85 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    Options
    Slivaf - Dreamweaver wrote: »
    Lol yea i went back and read it, but still... wtf... they actually tried taking land from them, which should be within the other stated rules. =x

    That alliance just seems to me like more of a on friendly terms with each other then full fledged allies. =x

    I agree with you actually. But the real problem here is people bashing on Aubree. Needs to stop please.
  • tori2
    tori2 Posts: 40 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    Options
    Slivaf - Dreamweaver wrote: »
    Lol yea i went back and read it, but still... wtf... they actually tried taking land from them, which should be within the other stated rules. =x

    That alliance just seems to me like more of a on friendly terms with each other then full fledged allies. =x

    I will state here as per Alaxan; "Inversion is not allied with any particular faction. We are on friendly terms with Calamity. We share a mutual enemy in Equinox. When it comes to TW, Inversion and Calamity both look forward to fighting each other on a competitive scale."

    Someone has to reclaim the map eventually right?
  • tori2
    tori2 Posts: 40 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    Options
    ShadowOfLife - Dreamweaver wrote: »
    I agree with you actually. But the real problem here is people bashing on Aubree. Needs to stop please.

    That was addressed here http://pwi-forum.perfectworld.com/showpost.php?p=10329872&postcount=156

    Trully though, it's an indirect bashing of Aubree. She has clearly violated a number of the rules, yet so quickly pointed a finger at Alaxan and Inversion. Simply because she was butt hurt that her collaborating was disrupted.
  • Aubree - Dreamweaver
    Aubree - Dreamweaver Posts: 1,868 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    Options
    tori2 wrote: »
    Equinox claims, substantially, to wanting a colorful map. Yet when we review the facts. Calamity has left the majority of the other factions on the server alone.

    When EQ packed up and moved south, they gave inversion a land. Who took that land from them? Calamity... just stop lying please.
  • Pacothenoob - Dreamweaver
    Pacothenoob - Dreamweaver Posts: 21 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    Options
    Great so if someone passes lead this means they are in fear of getting banned?
    I pass lead about once a month to my director and co-director so that we can have 2 with full leadership priveleges while im on my long nightshift work week usually. I work 12-17 hour shifts and like to make sure Tempest has complete leadership team ready and available. So dont accuse someone of being ready to be banned instead go ask for yourself why they made the decision.
    Funniest tw request ever b:thanks
  • adsagaeeeee
    adsagaeeeee Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    Options
    Aubree - Dreamweaver wrote: »
    When EQ packed up and moved south, they gave inversion a land. Who took that land from them? Calamity... just stop lying please.

    lying? he said the majority, not every land. and is this your come back? way to quote only this little part and disregard his whole post about how equinox uses other factions to try to gank calamity. seems like youre not denying it either. looks like equinox's true colors are finally coming out b:byeb:bye
  • SgtSIaughter - Heavens Tear
    SgtSIaughter - Heavens Tear Posts: 2,225 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    Options
    If a faction leader is due for an incoming ban and passes lead, the old and new leader get banned and possibly suffer a heightened punishment do to attempting to evade repercussions.

    You can't run from the punishment and trying to do so could further jeopardize your faction.

    If the leader gets permabanned, end of faction. Be smart.
    "Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory.
    Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat." ~Sun Tzu

    "Lennox Lewis, I'm coming for you man. My style is impetuous. My defense is impregnable, and I'm just ferocious. I want your heart. I want to eat his children. Praise be to Allah!"
    ~Iron Mike Tyson Enrage.omgforum.net
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • FatherTed - Dreamweaver
    FatherTed - Dreamweaver Posts: 3,723 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    Options
    Aubree - Dreamweaver wrote: »
    When EQ packed up and moved south, they gave inversion a land. Who took that land from them? Calamity... just stop lying please.

    You mean when you packed up and moved south for the purpose of punishing Dynasty for not helping you gank Cala strongly enough?
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    Thanks for the sig Ophida :3
  • tori2
    tori2 Posts: 40 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    Options
    Aubree - Dreamweaver wrote: »
    When EQ packed up and moved south, they gave inversion a land. Who took that land from them? Calamity... just stop lying please.

    Funny that's the only one you defend there out of ALL stated. Equinox lost TW intentionally (rule violation).

    If you follow the rest of the section you quoted though. It states "majority", not all. Yes calamity took that land from Inversion. After speaking w/ tyr, BB and more on it, it was actually a fair decision. They refused to gank Dynasty with Equinox that week and had only one other option in Vanquish.

    Yes Dynasty, Cala once made an active decision to leave you guys with a few plots of land. Until you allied with Equnox you weren't doing so bad. See how well Equinox treats its allies?
  • Aubree - Dreamweaver
    Aubree - Dreamweaver Posts: 1,868 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    Options
    tori2 wrote: »
    Funny that's the only one you defend there out of ALL stated. Equinox lost TW intentionally (rule violation).

    If you follow the rest of the section you quoted though. It states "majority", not all. Yes calamity took that land from Inversion. After speaking w/ tyr, BB and more on it, it was actually a fair decision. They refused to gank Dynasty with Equinox that week and had only one other option in Vanquish.

    Yes Dynasty, Cala once made an active decision to leave you guys with a few plots of land. Until you allied with Equnox you weren't doing so bad. See how well Equinox treats its allies?

    You forget that Calamity has had intentions of owning every land on DW "eveny if it is for a week", so your story holds no water. I remember a very long time ago, before I joined EQ, I was in a squad of 5 cala members then myself, fb89 brim. They talked for several minutes about ow they were going to take the wholemap, then give one piece of land on each corer to 1 faction each, and hold the rest. I was in a faction called Templiers, it was the reason I joined EQ. Thats well over a year now.
  • Slivaf - Dreamweaver
    Slivaf - Dreamweaver Posts: 2,106 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    Options
    Pacothenoob - Dreamweaver wrote: »
    Great so if someone passes lead this means they are in fear of getting banned?
    I pass lead about once a month to my director and co-director so that we can have 2 with full leadership priveleges while im on my long nightshift work week usually. I work 12-17 hour shifts and like to make sure Tempest has complete leadership team ready and available. So dont accuse someone of being ready to be banned instead go ask for yourself why they made the decision.

    It was a lot of if's, I don't know why she passed lead, and I don't care why she did it, but meh as I said earlier...
    One more thing if aubree did in fact pass lead to attack next week... that is a really underhanded tactic, but I guess there is no rules stating that she can't; however, if she is expecting a ban, then they should be in more trouble for it... IF they do get a ban. =x ... That to me is avoiding the repercussion of her actions. In the past the whole faction suffers for the actions of their leader, so Equinox should be no different... IF she does get a ban. =x

    I see so much uncertainty in my previous post, that is still here, there should be repercussion for her action of giving lead to someone else just before a POSSIBLE upcoming ban just so they can bid next weekend. I am not saying this was her precise reason for doing it, but it is an obvious side effect of her giving lead to someone else. =x JUST before a POSSIBLE Ban. xD... IF she does get banned. =x
    Ah, Mistakes are so easily made. ~ laura resnick

    What kind of message are you sending when you insult my intelligence? ~ Me ~ 5/29/2015 (Yes it is possible someone said this before just no idea who/where.)
  • Pacothenoob - Dreamweaver
    Pacothenoob - Dreamweaver Posts: 21 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    Options
    FatherTed - Dreamweaver wrote: »
    Only EQ and Dyna. Maybe Tempest, if their EQ alts are fighting for them.

    Funny you bring up EQ alts as Tempest has only about 7 of them in faction but guess what we have about 6 Cala alts so before you listen to hear say again find out the truth. We are not an EQ alt faction and our tw vs Inversion was won fair and square with 3 cala alts there for the Tw we had more than 90 online ready to fight so no way just a few alts were the reason we won. Our people were ready for a win weve worked hard for over a year for it.
    Funniest tw request ever b:thanks
  • tori2
    tori2 Posts: 40 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    Options
    Aubree - Dreamweaver wrote: »
    You forget that Calamity has had intentions of owning every land on DW "eveny if it is for a week", so your story holds no water.

    They set a goal, they are achieving it. Ironically with Equinox's HELP. Open your eyes! Equinox was the faction to destroy any of the original major contenders. Equinox even broke Dynasty so badly it doesn't stand a legitimate chance at even a defense. Equinox did this! Just as much as Calamity. Only... Equinox did so while claiming to want to see a big rainbow colored map!
  • drjiggle
    drjiggle Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    Options
    Kantorek wrote: »
    Small factions

    Factions with too few members should not bid.

    Factions with a low level average should not bid.

    This sounds good in theory, but I hope you plan to practice some discretion in your enforcement.

    If I were allowed to talk about bans, I could tell you the story of a faction leader who was banned because her faction was too small, too low level, and had no "legitimate chance to win." In fact, they had our crystal down to 7 million with our defenders pinned down in the respawn area until my squad switched wars, pushed them out of our base, and ended it. If you looked at the factions player by player, then sure, they had no chance to win, but we had two other wars to defend that day, so they hoped to take advantage of the situation and pull out an unexpected victory. They very nearly did and certainly could have. But PWI got enough complaints from good, paying customers, so they buckled and banned her.

    If you're going to post in other threads about how you made extremely unpopular changes to TW in order to promote bidding and participation by smaller factions, then you need to allow those smaller factions to bid without fearing that they'll be banned. What may seem to you like no "legitimate chance to win" may be someone else's dream of being David to a larger faction's Goliath.
  • FatherTed - Dreamweaver
    FatherTed - Dreamweaver Posts: 3,723 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    Options
    Pacothenoob - Dreamweaver wrote: »
    Funny you bring up EQ alts as Tempest has only about 7 of them in faction but guess what we have about 6 Cala alts so before you listen to hear say again find out the truth. We are not an EQ alt faction and our tw vs Inversion was won fair and square with 3 cala alts there for the Tw we had more than 90 online ready to fight so no way just a few alts were the reason we won. Our people were ready for a win weve worked hard for over a year for it.

    I wasn't suggesting you guys were an EQ alt faction, nor that they were the reason you beat Inversion. I'm well aware of the strength of your guild, as I have a couple of friends in there and squad with Tempest members frequently. That said, the EQ alts you do have are some of your strongest fighters - hence my statement suggesting you'd have a better chance if they did fight for you.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    Thanks for the sig Ophida :3
  • I_sage_i - Harshlands
    I_sage_i - Harshlands Posts: 332 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    Options
    Rawrgh - Raging Tide wrote: »
    You're interpreting it incorrectly


    You read it as: If a faction has a disadvantage at all, then it shouldn't bid because it will likely lose.


    What it means is: If a faction CANNOT WIN THE WAR AT ALL NO MATTER WHAT, then it shouldn't bid.

    im confused. how do you gain experience if you dont try?
  • Aubree - Dreamweaver
    Aubree - Dreamweaver Posts: 1,868 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    Options
    tori2 wrote: »
    They set a goal, they are achieving it. Ironically with Equinox's HELP. Open your eyes! Equinox was the faction to destroy any of the original major contenders. Equinox even broke Dynasty so badly it doesn't stand a legitimate chance at even a defense. Equinox did this! Just as much as Calamity. Only... Equinox did so while claiming to want to see a big rainbow colored map!

    I have high hopes for Tempest and Dynasty. I hold them in the greatest of esteem. It wasn't until I had lead of EQ that I got to know them. I hope that during our conversations they found me as honest as possible, and my intentions clear. I really do hope they take a land every week from calamity even if EQ can't. I hope they build a strong faction to make the map more colors. I hope more factions rise into power. These are all hopes. But they are sincere and I wish them all the best.
  • tori2
    tori2 Posts: 40 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    Options
    Pacothenoob - Dreamweaver wrote: »
    Funny you bring up EQ alts as Tempest has only about 7 of them in faction but guess what we have about 6 Cala alts so before you listen to hear say again find out the truth. We are not an EQ alt faction and our tw vs Inversion was won fair and square with 3 cala alts there for the Tw we had more than 90 online ready to fight so no way just a few alts were the reason we won. Our people were ready for a win weve worked hard for over a year for it.

    Alts or not. Your bids now, Paco, have been collaborated with Equinox. Your fight vs Inversion was a good, fun, fair fight. Inversion made tactical errors that cost the battle. It would have been nice for a rematch. Outside of the multiple Equinox taunts, harrassment on world chat and in whispers as Inversion conrgadulated you guys on a well fought TW, it was a pleasant experience.

    Shame is those 7 EQ alts went in with +10 gear and nirvana. It helped a LOT and I know only one of your Cala alts attended. More so was that those were the members of Tempest that showed a very poor repoir for Tempest after the fight was done.
  • Conavar - Heavens Tear
    Conavar - Heavens Tear Posts: 1,193 Arc User
    edited September 2010
    Options
    Ladies and Gents plz **** and take it to the DW section of the forums.

    The constant petty server arguements are going to do nothing but get a valid thread locked

    Ty

    b:surrender
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
This discussion has been closed.

Categories