Clarification on Rules - VVA Mystic

[admin]

It has come to our attention that there have been some arguments whether rules are violated with VV members attacking VVA guild's Mystic in the current round of Mystic Wars. While the complete answer maybe unclear, it boils down to 3 points that we will use guideline in the future.

1. Did VVA intentionally kick members to intentionally drop below minimum defense required? While it does appear there were some members removed from the guild, it doesn't look like VVA was going to have the 30 members to have defenders regardless. If this was indeed done intentionally, then it would be an exploit and a violation of the rules.

2. Is it okay to have sister guilds. The answer here is yes. Just as guilds can form alliances, they can declare themselves as sister guilds with other guilds. However, it's not encouraged have a big network of sister guilds as it defeats the spirit of competition.

3. Is it okay for sister guilds to attack their own un-guarded Mystics. While there was no clear rule specification on this before, we will set forth to say that it's against the rules from now on. Not only is it illogical from a "war" perspective when you have positioned yourself as sister guilds, it can be viewed as the mystic was intentionally setup to allow sister guild members to reap experience rewards and preventing other guilds from getting it.

[Kalon]

1. VVA has never had 30 members yet. It's a new guild.
2. Alright.
3. Can we have a clear specification on what is a sister guild? Greg from WPK was once in VV. They are still under 30 members and are highly likely to get statues again. Are we allowed to attack them? What other guilds are officially sister guilds other than VV and VVA? Right now, it seems that the only "formal" sister guild is VV-VVA. Also, what will be the punishment for breaking this rule?

Finally, how can it be viewed as mystics being intentionally setup for only one guild to hit? Or how can other guilds be prevented from hitting it? How far can we take this? If VV attacks every Fallen and kills it in say, 15 minutes, are we preventing other guilds from reaping those xp, items, and other rewards? If a guild decided to win EVERY city in an invasion (which IS intentionally preventing other guilds from getting it) are they going to be "in trouble"? Two cities? One city? Because, having one city means there's a hundred other guilds that can't get it.

For VVA specifically...

How is being the first statue, defenseless at that time and before any other statues were up and giving all guilds time to hostile it, and not having the last statue to trigger when the war phase started, preventing other guilds from hitting? This time, again, not the last statue.

P.S.
Can we have a list of which guilds cannot attack which? We have former VV members in many guilds, two of which at least we highly suspect will have undefended mystic statues again (VVA and WPK).

[admin]

Sister guild is when you clearly states the relation in your description, or if your guild officers and members are shared (moved back and forth) between the two guilds.

[ava]

Can i get a clarification on #3 please?

Is it only disallowed if the statue is unguarded?

~ava

[Mael]

Those rules sound pretty stupid. Why even have to enforce rules if you will just change it so you can't get a mystic if there aren't enough to defend? Instead you've made it look like people were guilty of some type of exploit when that was never the intention. If it were, you would see a lot more of the actual VV members doing damage. Change your code, make it easier to understand for everyone...especially the dimwitted that can't seem to quit posting.

[e rock]

3. Is it okay for sister guilds to attack their own un-guarded Mystics. While there was no clear rule specification on this before, we will set forth to say that it's against the rules from now on. Not only is it illogical from a "war" perspective when you have positioned yourself as sister guilds, it can be viewed as the mystic was intentionally setup to allow sister guild members to reap experience rewards and preventing other guilds from getting it.

This makes no sense at all. If the mystic is up, it's up for everybody. There is no advantage garnered for the "sister" guild.

Whether or not it's worth it to inflict additional damage on a sister guild's mystic is a question that should be answered for each individual guild - not one that needs to be answered by additional game rules. In some cases, it may indeed be "illogical from a war perspective", but in others it may be more advantageous to the associated guilds.

Let us/them/whatever work that out please.

[remedialjoe]

3. Is it okay for sister guilds to attack their own un-guarded Mystics. While there was no clear rule specification on this before, we will set forth to say that it's against the rules from now on. Not only is it illogical from a "war" perspective when you have positioned yourself as sister guilds, it can be viewed as the mystic was intentionally setup to allow sister guild members to reap experience rewards and preventing other guilds from getting it.

this isnt the first time the devs have made rules to please the few illogical whiners. it's sickening to think they call themselves devs. this rule is a attempt to hold back a select few. the real issue that should have been addressed is: harassing the members of VV and VVA with this petty banter about an exploit. which by making this rule you're justifying their actions and quite frankly in violation of fb's tos. as a dev you r to offer customer service to all that is consistent. fred can be banned just for some 1 reporting him without a bit of evidence. yet i receive emails stating "we cant control out of game convo" when clearly the convo and issue was in game with logs and logs of evidence. maybe rethink your stance on picking sides when it becomes to a clear cut case of harassment to do so.

[svala]

this isnt the first time the devs have made rules to please the few illogical whiners. it's sickening to think they call themselves devs. this rule is a attempt to hold back a select few. the real issue that should have been addressed is: harassing the members of VV and VVA with this petty banter about an exploit. which by making this rule you're justifying their actions and quite frankly in violation of fb's tos. as a dev you r to offer customer service to all that is consistent. fred can be banned just for some 1 reporting him without a bit of evidence. yet i receive emails stating "we cant control out of game convo" when clearly the convo and issue was in game with logs and logs of evidence. maybe rethink your stance on picking sides when it becomes to a clear cut case of harassment to do so.

Obviously, the people who brought up the VVA issue weren't "illogical whiners", since their argument was more convincing than yours and the developers of the game agreed with them.

Pointing out a possible exploit in the game is hardly harassment. Calling people names, however, could be construed as harassment. And before you start calling me names, I wasn't one of the people who complained about the mystics. But the people who did so had every right to voice their opinion, and apparently they were right in the eyes of the people who developed this game.

[Viktor]

So every guild can abuse the free xp and coins just as long as they don't call themselves sister guild. And really VV members had no idea when the last statue was going up, could have happened when no VV members were online. So why are VV members not allowed to use the free xp and coins just like others do?

And about VV knowing that the statue was going up, if any 1 bothered to look at the fame when the war phase is up then
you could have easily seen that VVA were putting up a statue. Blaming VV for yourself not paying attention to small details is kind of silly.

How about just changing the mystic war. Guild with less then 30 members can't build a statue instead of removing the defenders

[remedialjoe]

Pointing out a possible exploit in the game is hardly harassment. Calling people names, however, could be construed as harassment. And before you start calling me names, I wasn't one of the people who complained about the mystics. But the people who did so had every right to voice their opinion, and apparently they were right in the eyes of the people who developed this game.

ofc it's not. but when it's the same person over and over.. all the time then it becomes harassment. and yes ur guilty as the next. see i dont follow ur guild around and nit pick all they do. thats when simple stuff becomes harassment. i cant even log into global chat out of fear i'll be attacked for being a 'cheater' because i am in VV.. so yes thats harassment. it makes the game less enjoyable 4 me and our guild. it brings us unwanted stress and attention. see vv nor vva asked to nit picked to the point of flaw. we are people and have feelings/ emotions. the sad thing is svala, you are so blind to the fact your acting the way you are that it's actually amusing. see coming to this thread to comment on my post (negatives) has got to fall some where under stalking. and yes past practice makes it that. if it was the first time maybe not harassment. but this is well in the the dbl digits started when u were vv and has continued even after you were removed from the guild for the same behavior. so before you label me a viscous name calling cheater, stop and think about what your actually doing as you do.