TVVAT2 rezzing against TVVAT makes no sense

Epic Trolling / flame wars. The best of this forum distilled for your reading pleasure.
Kirisame Marisa
Low profile
Low profile
Posts: 54
Joined: 15 Jun 2013, 01:10

Re: TVVAT2 rezzing against TVVAT makes no sense

Post by Kirisame Marisa » 18 Jun 2013, 08:03

Rainbow King wrote: Then why ask? hee hee xD

n00blet, if you feed a clan, you feed the members that are in the clan.

see the definition of feeding (emphasis mine):

"Definition:

Any attempt to use another Battle Stations account to level up faster, such that, it is done with the intention to let the winner of the attack acquire gold and experience points more quickly and easily than he usually would. This will include using accounts belonging to his friends who want to help him."
Rainbow King wrote: Read this page VERY carefully :*
http://mobileweapon.net/battlestations/ ... %20Feeding

I read it very carefully indeed, and would like to quote a previous post of mine in response:
Kirisame Marisa wrote:Under current combat rules, for a defender to win an attack, all he or she has to do is to survive the attack. And for an attacker to win an attack, he or she must sink the defender. As such, until the last hit that finally sinks it, the fort is always the winner of the attack when it encounters an attacker. It would be ridiculous to accuse the attackers of feeding a clan fort, because of b) "the winner of the attack must acquire gold and experience points more quickly and easily than he usually would". A clan fort clearly cannot gain experience points or gold from winning a defence encounter. As such, a clan can never feed or be fed.
(according to rules accessed on 18 June 2013, 1100 GMT+8)

Rainbow King
Well known
Well known
Posts: 782
Joined: 09 Nov 2011, 05:52
Location: Riding my Rainbows towards Sios's destruction!!
Contact:

Re: TVVAT2 rezzing against TVVAT makes no sense

Post by Rainbow King » 18 Jun 2013, 08:10

-All GM decisions are final in the game and indisputable.
-Appeals will not be entertained.
-Items once removed, will not be reinstated under any circumstances.

Kirisame Marisa
Low profile
Low profile
Posts: 54
Joined: 15 Jun 2013, 01:10

Re: TVVAT2 rezzing against TVVAT makes no sense

Post by Kirisame Marisa » 18 Jun 2013, 08:17

Rainbow King wrote:-All GM decisions are final in the game and indisputable.
-Appeals will not be entertained.
-Items once removed, will not be reinstated under any circumstances.
Is this a Tyler employee's response to a customer's attempt to provide feedback on a mistake made by the GM? And as I pointed out earlier, the GM's decision is only as final as it is recent ,and I am sure that it is not in GM's interest to allow a mistake to be characterised as the final decision on this issue.

Rick Fleiwind
Unfamiliar
Unfamiliar
Posts: 15
Joined: 15 Nov 2011, 09:48
Location: Back from the Dead... So they say.

Re: TVVAT2 rezzing against TVVAT makes no sense

Post by Rick Fleiwind » 18 Jun 2013, 08:39

(Who could've thought I'd be arguing with my fav char... Heh.)

-Appeals will not be entertained.

I guess that's pretty much sums the whole thread.

Master of Clan X
Prominent
Prominent
Posts: 3105
Joined: 09 Nov 2011, 03:39
Location: I am the Master of Clan X

Re: TVVAT2 rezzing against TVVAT makes no sense

Post by Master of Clan X » 18 Jun 2013, 08:42

Kirisame Marisa wrote: Is this a Tyler employee's response to a customer's attempt to provide feedback on a mistake made by the GM?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=buHv1EvUHj0

Kirisame Marisa
Low profile
Low profile
Posts: 54
Joined: 15 Jun 2013, 01:10

Re: TVVAT2 rezzing against TVVAT makes no sense

Post by Kirisame Marisa » 18 Jun 2013, 08:43

Rick Fleiwind wrote:(Who could've thought I'd be arguing with my fav char... Heh.)

-Appeals will not be entertained.

I guess that's pretty much sums the whole thread.
I was pretty surprised that the name wasn't already taken actually. Also, think of it not as an appeal, but rather, a complaint, or perhaps a suggestion ze~

Master of Clan X
Prominent
Prominent
Posts: 3105
Joined: 09 Nov 2011, 03:39
Location: I am the Master of Clan X

Re: TVVAT2 rezzing against TVVAT makes no sense

Post by Master of Clan X » 18 Jun 2013, 08:50

Kirisame Marisa wrote:but rather, a complaint, or perhaps a suggestion ze~
Multis aren't real people and therefore cannot make complaints.

Post your captain name here or f**k off and send a support ticket.

Kirisame Marisa
Low profile
Low profile
Posts: 54
Joined: 15 Jun 2013, 01:10

Re: TVVAT2 rezzing against TVVAT makes no sense

Post by Kirisame Marisa » 18 Jun 2013, 08:52

Master of Clan X wrote:
Kirisame Marisa wrote:but rather, a complaint, or perhaps a suggestion ze~
Multis aren't real people and therefore cannot make complaints.

Post your captain name here or f**k off and send a support ticket.
Sent one about an hour ago actually.

Master of Clan X
Prominent
Prominent
Posts: 3105
Joined: 09 Nov 2011, 03:39
Location: I am the Master of Clan X

Re: TVVAT2 rezzing against TVVAT makes no sense

Post by Master of Clan X » 18 Jun 2013, 09:30

Kirisame Marisa wrote: Sent one about an hour ago actually.
Good, then you can't expect any official Tyler answers here since you're hiding behind your multi like the chicken shit you are. Brod can tell you to go stick it and you can't complain.

Kirisame Marisa wrote: One cannot admit to an infringement that doesn't exist.
So according to you: there is no rule against clan feeding but you did it anyway.

What happened to "defender training" and "war of attrition"? running out of excuses to justify your cheating?

hon
Prominent
Prominent
Posts: 3027
Joined: 13 Mar 2012, 05:50
Contact:

Re: TVVAT2 rezzing against TVVAT makes no sense

Post by hon » 18 Jun 2013, 09:34

Go and sue Tyler in court of law :P

Kirisame Marisa
Low profile
Low profile
Posts: 54
Joined: 15 Jun 2013, 01:10

Re: TVVAT2 rezzing against TVVAT makes no sense

Post by Kirisame Marisa » 18 Jun 2013, 10:04

Master of Clan X wrote:
Good, then you can't expect any official Tyler answers here since you're hiding behind your multi like the chicken shit you are. Brod can tell you to go stick it and you can't complain.

I don't recall seeing any rule stating that Tyler employees are barred from answering concerns voiced by multis. Also, you're hiding behind your pseudonym too.

Master of Clan X wrote:
So according to you: there is no rule against clan feeding but you did it anyway.
According to me, and more importantly, the rules, there is no such thing as clan feeding. It simply isn't defined in the rules.

Abe Lincoln
Low profile
Low profile
Posts: 79
Joined: 09 Jan 2013, 07:14

Re: TVVAT2 rezzing against TVVAT makes no sense

Post by Abe Lincoln » 18 Jun 2013, 14:26

Kirisame Marisa wrote:
Master of Clan X wrote:
So according to you: there is no rule against clan feeding but you did it anyway.
According to me, and more importantly, the rules, there is no such thing as clan feeding. It simply isn't defined in the rules.
Then how about we try the skill you seem to have never learned, called common sense. If it's against the rules for a captain to help another captain by intentionally sinking his SHIP to help them gain exp more easily, then why would it be allowed for one clan to help another clan by intentionally sinking their FORT to help them gain exp more easily? The threads you're grasping to aren't even threads in this analogy. You're hanging to dear life my an argument made up of venomous snakes that only wish to inflict harm onto you. Just drop the 2 feet you're hanging and shut up. You're only making more trouble for yourself. Just give up this ruse you've created.

You really DON'T want your motherclan to get in trouble, do you? That's the only logical reason I can think of anyone trying to argue bullshit and pretend like they don't realize it's bullshit. It's like some sort of misguided online filibuster against the truth.

Master of Clan X
Prominent
Prominent
Posts: 3105
Joined: 09 Nov 2011, 03:39
Location: I am the Master of Clan X

Re: TVVAT2 rezzing against TVVAT makes no sense

Post by Master of Clan X » 18 Jun 2013, 15:47

Kirisame Marisa wrote: I don't recall seeing any rule stating that Tyler employees are barred from answering concerns voiced by multis.
You like to use big words but you have the reading comprehension of a 2-year old. I didn't say Brod can't answer you. I said he could tell you to piss off and wouldn't be bad customer service cos you're NOT a real player and hence NOT customer.

Kirisame Marisa wrote:you already have, LL.
Kirisame Marisa wrote:Also, you're hiding behind your pseudonym too.


Your piss poor memory is acting up again. You already knew who I was. So does everyone in this thread.

If you weren't guilty you wouldn't have to hide but you're just Manure's butt fuckin buddy who will mindlessly defend his feeding rezzes.

Sneaky Miggy
Well known
Well known
Posts: 940
Joined: 15 Jun 2012, 19:09
Location: Wouldn't you like to know

Re: TVVAT2 rezzing against TVVAT makes no sense

Post by Sneaky Miggy » 18 Jun 2013, 20:43

Kirisame Marisa wrote:Under current combat rules, for a defender to win an attack, all he or she has to do is to survive the attack. And for an attacker to win an attack, he or she must sink the defender. As such, until the last hit that finally sinks it, the fort is always the winner of the attack when it encounters an attacker. It would be ridiculous to accuse the attackers of feeding a clan fort, because of b) "the winner of the attack must acquire gold and experience points more quickly and easily than he usually would". A clan fort clearly cannot gain experience points or gold from winning a defence encounter. As such, a clan can never feed or be fed.
Think of clan wars in this way:

The Clans are now "Players"
The Forts are now "Player ships"
The members attacking and defending are the weapons equipped to the ships.
The fort sinks are the experience.
In this context Clan Wars is now PVP, and it is feeding.

Master of Clan X
Prominent
Prominent
Posts: 3105
Joined: 09 Nov 2011, 03:39
Location: I am the Master of Clan X

Re: TVVAT2 rezzing against TVVAT makes no sense

Post by Master of Clan X » 19 Jun 2013, 01:09

He can only argue semantics because he's been caught with his pants down and Manure up his arse.

Locked