Capitulation rules changed?

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

  • we already replaced your troop last nights - so stop writing false infos here! You have got a castle from one of these 3.
    It should be clear that this is forbidden and defined by me already. You couldnt also got an castle gift when they are stil in capitulation!

    stop writing statements like "fuck admins deleted troops" and so on - you could simply ask what happend here. When you have troops in a castle which isn't yours, its not suprising what happend with your troops.
  • Dschibait wrote:

    stop discussing with me when you don't have any informations!

    Paladinextra starts attacks first ... so yeah, this is a defense action.
    If he wouldn't attack before this, we could discuss about that action, but so, its just a defense of what he have.
    when i look in the hall of fame i see only attacks from JG to others on the day after leaving capitulation... so how is it possible to think that others attack them ? Even stronger: no one was aware of the fact that they left capitulation mode so no one was focssed on atacking them... not the time of a hit is a decisive element... the time of starting troops on the way is ... is there any posibility to see so far back in time in the logs ?

    The post was edited 1 time, last by dYvorra ().

  • dYvorra wrote:

    Dschibait wrote:

    stop discussing with me when you don't have any informations!

    Paladinextra starts attacks first ... so yeah, this is a defense action.
    If he wouldn't attack before this, we could discuss about that action, but so, its just a defense of what he have.
    when i look in the hall of fame i see only attacks from JG to others on the day after leaving capitulation... so how is it possible to think that others attack them ? Even stronger: no one was aware of the fact that they left capitulation mode so no one was focssed on atacking them... not the time of a hit is a decisive element... the time of starting troops on the way is ... is there any posibility to see so far back in time in the logs ?
    I second this.
    Maybe NATO started attacks first, bit they didn't make those 3 players lose a lot of troops.
    What those 3 players did the other way around...
  • vanmorris, what is your point, a attack is an attack, when you push someone in the corner he/she fights back with everything what is left.

    the NATO players wouldnt lose a lot too if they would not defend the conquered castles (same logic as yours) I dont get your point. you dont unterstand that they maybe tried with everything that was left to get back the castles.

    the easiest would have been when put these 3 players in attack protection so they could have healed their troops and then put them back in capitulation
  • pairsn wrote:

    vanmorris, what is your point, a attack is an attack, when you push someone in the corner he/she fights back with everything what is left.

    the NATO players wouldnt lose a lot too if they would not defend the conquered castles (same logic as yours) I dont get your point. you dont unterstand that they maybe tried with everything that was left to get back the castles.

    the easiest would have been when put these 3 players in attack protection so they could have healed their troops and then put them back in capitulation
    That is the thing I don't understand.
    Why bring them out of capitulation for 14 days when they are not allowed to attack/be attacked?

    I understand that they attack castles which were taken after they were placed out of capitulation (I have no problem with lost troops in those castles also!).
    The problem I have is with their attacks on castles which were taken BEFORE they capitulated.
    Trying to take those castles back is just abusing their situation.
  • dYvorra wrote:

    Dschibait wrote:

    stop discussing with me when you don't have any informations!

    Paladinextra starts attacks first ... so yeah, this is a defense action.
    If he wouldn't attack before this, we could discuss about that action, but so, its just a defense of what he have.
    when i look in the hall of fame i see only attacks from JG to others on the day after leaving capitulation... so how is it possible to think that others attack them ? Even stronger: no one was aware of the fact that they left capitulation mode so no one was focssed on atacking them... not the time of a hit is a decisive element... the time of starting troops on the way is ... is there any posibility to see so far back in time in the logs ?
    what exactly do you want to say here ?

    That the Gameoperator team which has access to all logs, reports and to any account dosn't see the other attacks? Did you rly think that we lie on that fact - which anyone can see. When i tell that he starts attacking and it wouldn't be true, did you think that he isn't the first one who would come to the forum and would complain about that?

    i didn't see the point of this post at all!

    only to say this, if no one shared this report you havn't access to them. Also if he isn't big enough to be in the first 100.
    so maybe you should think about if you trust us or not - if not, there is no point to write here anymore.
  • Dschibait wrote:

    dYvorra wrote:

    Dschibait wrote:

    stop discussing with me when you don't have any informations!

    Paladinextra starts attacks first ... so yeah, this is a defense action.
    If he wouldn't attack before this, we could discuss about that action, but so, its just a defense of what he have.
    when i look in the hall of fame i see only attacks from JG to others on the day after leaving capitulation... so how is it possible to think that others attack them ? Even stronger: no one was aware of the fact that they left capitulation mode so no one was focssed on atacking them... not the time of a hit is a decisive element... the time of starting troops on the way is ... is there any posibility to see so far back in time in the logs ?
    what exactly do you want to say here ?
    That the Gameoperator team which has access to all logs, reports and to any account dosn't see the other attacks? Did you rly think that we lie on that fact - which anyone can see. When i tell that he starts attacking and it wouldn't be true, did you think that he isn't the first one who would come to the forum and would complain about that?

    i didn't see the point of this post at all!

    only to say this, if no one shared this report you havn't access to them. Also if he isn't big enough to be in the first 100.
    so maybe you should think about if you trust us or not - if not, there is no point to write here anymore.
    this has nothing to do with trust ? I just respond to former posts and base myself on the info available to me ... ending with a neutral question ... off course you see other attacks... but do you also log the time of start sending ? Then it s ok to make a statement on who attacked first... else it s just a guess based on what one can see ... and i wonder how NATO could be first atacker since all where assuming there was a capitulation... so no one even COULD have attacked first
  • You do not read the topics you yourself started????


    "Wir haben dies besprochen;

    alle Spieler die in den letzten 30 Tagen in den Kapitulationsmodus gegangen sind, bieten wir an das sie diesen verlassen können um Truppen zu heilen; diese Spieler können aber frühstens nach 14 Tagen erneut in den Kapitulationsmodus.

    Das Angebot steht bis einschließlich Sonntag den 24. Mai 2020,"
    board.bitmeup.com/index.php/Th…-Strategie-wird/?pageNo=2

    You do not need a translation as you started this German topic dYvorra. But for all players that do:
    "We discussed this;

    we offer all players who have gone into surrender mode in the last 30 days so that they can leave it to heal troops; however, these players can only return to surrender mode after 14 days at the earliest.

    The offer is available until Sunday, May 24, 2020, "


    So all could have known these players would come out of capitulation.

    The post was edited 1 time, last by Juflo ().

  • hey guys,

    i read your comments and offers, advices and critics some days.
    to be honest: it is not usefull to give the "golden ass card" to the admins. the rules are clear since months - yes sometimes hard and some of us feel rules are not fair - but they are clear.
    and some of us, not only members of Jendrzej Group, did mistakes by blaming admins with wrong word for maybe right intentions.
    In the end some players had or have a ban because of some actions or conversations.
    i read the rules again and again and to be honest.
    the only mistake of last months is that we try to change rules in different situations. not only one time or two time...every time and it is impossible and not the right way.

    Dschibait always talk with respect to me whenever we had a talk or i have a problem.
    so i cannot understand some intentions and some arguments that admins shall be unfair all the time or do against JG and others.
    We did the mistakes for that situation now.

    so lets end the bashing against Dschibait and other admins and find solutions to calm down and try to enjoy the game, the fights with wins and losses.
    N05F3R4TU_4LUC4RD, member of Jendrzej Group :evil:
  • Dschibait wrote:

    we talked with these 3 playesrs (are only these 3 players who has capitulated in past 30 days - or players from there alliance).

    I wrote them that they have only this oppertunity to HEAL troops - i wrote that they don't fight, don't lose more troops and dont attack at all.
    They have only the chance to come back with the correct losing amount where you can capitulate.
    this is just fair, to let them heal this, what they could also heal before the capitulation and still go into capitulation.

    If they attack something or do other actions which are not possible outside of capitulation - i don't would go for defending, if they are forced its ok to bring actions - but take overs are a point which makes a capitulation not possible at all.

    So they got strong requirements / rules for doing this capitulation case here.
    if they don't hold this on, they will be blocked for life.

    Juflo wrote:

    You do not read the topics you yourself started????


    "Wir haben dies besprochen;

    alle Spieler die in den letzten 30 Tagen in den Kapitulationsmodus gegangen sind, bieten wir an das sie diesen verlassen können um Truppen zu heilen; diese Spieler können aber frühstens nach 14 Tagen erneut in den Kapitulationsmodus.

    Das Angebot steht bis einschließlich Sonntag den 24. Mai 2020,"
    board.bitmeup.com/index.php/Th…-Strategie-wird/?pageNo=2

    You do not need a translation as you started this German topic dYvorra. But for all players that do:
    "We discussed this;

    we offer all players who have gone into surrender mode in the last 30 days so that they can leave it to heal troops; however, these players can only return to surrender mode after 14 days at the earliest.

    The offer is available until Sunday, May 24, 2020, "


    So all could have known these players would come out of capitulation.
    Dear Judith, it was not about the question in the German part but because of all the accusations made in this thread, PLUS the question if someone broke an agreement and the consequence as stated by Dschibait.

    Second is that the option was given this does not necesarily mean that one will accept.
    The quote you refer to dates from Wednesday 20th... and i doubt if non German players read the German part of the forum frequently.

    It s therfore about another matter which occurred sundaynight

    The post was edited 2 times, last by dYvorra ().

  • dYvorra wrote:

    and i wonder how NATO could be first atacker since all where assuming there was a capitulation... so no one even COULD have attacked first

    Juflo wrote:

    So all could have known these players would come out of capitulation.

    You try to keep a discussion, that has long since bled to death for lack of good arguments, allive. All Nato had to do is keep an eye on the three players and regularly check whether they would come out of capitulation.
    I think it's pretty rude that you use my first name in this forum. All players are addressed here by their player name.
    Moreover, this is not something that belongs in a topic about bugs and problems. As far as I'm concerned, this topic can be closed.

    The post was edited 1 time, last by Juflo ().

  • dYvorra wrote:

    Dschibait wrote:

    dYvorra wrote:

    Dschibait wrote:

    stop discussing with me when you don't have any informations!

    Paladinextra starts attacks first ... so yeah, this is a defense action.
    If he wouldn't attack before this, we could discuss about that action, but so, its just a defense of what he have.
    when i look in the hall of fame i see only attacks from JG to others on the day after leaving capitulation... so how is it possible to think that others attack them ? Even stronger: no one was aware of the fact that they left capitulation mode so no one was focssed on atacking them... not the time of a hit is a decisive element... the time of starting troops on the way is ... is there any posibility to see so far back in time in the logs ?
    what exactly do you want to say here ?That the Gameoperator team which has access to all logs, reports and to any account dosn't see the other attacks? Did you rly think that we lie on that fact - which anyone can see. When i tell that he starts attacking and it wouldn't be true, did you think that he isn't the first one who would come to the forum and would complain about that?

    i didn't see the point of this post at all!

    only to say this, if no one shared this report you havn't access to them. Also if he isn't big enough to be in the first 100.
    so maybe you should think about if you trust us or not - if not, there is no point to write here anymore.
    this has nothing to do with trust ? I just respond to former posts and base myself on the info available to me ... ending with a neutral question ... off course you see other attacks... but do you also log the time of start sending ? Then it s ok to make a statement on who attacked first... else it s just a guess based on what one can see ... and i wonder how NATO could be first atacker since all where assuming there was a capitulation... so no one even COULD have attacked first
    Battle lost
    The defender surrendered.
    The senator persuaded '33% of the castle dwellers.
    24.05.2020 03:09:24
    Paladinextra
    -B 0--paladin
    -OSTRY-
    for Twinny 2

  • Urotsukidoji wrote:

    Dschibait wrote:

    we already replaced your troop last nights - so stop writing false infos here! You have got a castle from one of these 3.
    I only have two questions... to whom troops have been returned and why?
    it was from kadamis - i don't like name calling, so one of these 3 which comes out of capitulation (i think you will see ingame which one it was) had gifted a castle to kadamis. And yes, this isn't allowed from us, like i introduced here are the removing of capitulatiion under special rules like that these players don't do things what they shouldn't do in capitulation - except defending actions / strike backs to defending there castles.

    here is a castle sended as a gift - which we removed from kadamis back to one of this 3.
    Finally some troops where in that castle - im pretty sure that kadamis dosn't know about this situation, but finally, by changing the holder of that castle with our tools we dosn't check if there are troops in that castle.
    Who should know that kadamis placed most of his troops inside that "new" castle ? ;)

    so - it was just a booking problem, we fixed that after 1hour or so - but you know - some players (still no name calling) says in different chat systems that we want to help NATO and so on - blabla.
    But that this could be a simple background and a understandable problem - we don't have such a case of booking castles onto other players - seems like this isn't understandable from some polnish speaking players like JG name spenting player himself - ups - name calling? ;)

    right now, everything is fine - right now, we didn't see battles in that situation which should be recalled - if you think there is one, write a support ticket.
  • Hola buenas tardes a todos. Acabo de revisar mis informes y, como veo, no tengo ningún ataque contra el castillo de jendrez. o al menos no puedo encontrarlo. Mi intención no es decir que nuestro moderador está equivocado, pero no veo ningún informe de ataque de mi lista antes de los ataques del jugador jendrez. según mis cálculos el jugador jendrez fue el primero en atacar.



    Hello good afternoon to everyone. I just reviewed my reports and as I see I have no attack on jendrez castle. or at least I can't find it. My intention is not to say that our moderator is wrong, but I don't see any attack reports from my list prior to the jendrez player attacks. according to my calculations the player jendrez was the first to attack.
  • you attacked one of these 3 players first; like i say - defending actions or help is allowed. We could discuss about this when it was someone who wasn't capitulating, because they can't help someone in capitulation; but a defending action also on this 3 was allowed.

    so im not "wrong" its just a definition of what you think is "defending" - if you attack someone you have to know that you will get defended.