Tyhelior

A better question is : Do we consider : green-on-green = open shoot , or do we admit Naval action has a more in-depth combat system, and we can consider that body-blocking on purpose someone is a game mechanism? Preventing someone to open fire on a weak target by blocking the sight is a game mechanism or not? Using our ship as a shield for an ally is a game mechanism or not? Please, as you know naval action is a game well developed, and asking us : Who shoot first? like if we were playing a basic turn by turn board game will not provide smart answers. This pirate player use an exploit about green-on-green, and you can see it by watching the video. Good night good sailors.

Couldn't we be sure he joinded the french side on purpose to cheat using the green-on-green rule? What make me think that: He admit being on the wrong side, and he tells the french to shoot on him, BUT he didn't shoot on purpose on the french. -> IF it was a mystake, a could have left (nor french or pirate or allied danes would have shout on him for 1 min 40). -> The only legit reason that can make him stay is that his ship was needed to win the battle. BUT he didn't openly open fire on french captains. He clearly didn't want to openly go against the green-on-green rule but wanted his ennemy to do so (He tells french to shoot at him). His strategy was to use the green-on-green rule to be immune to french because of their high respect of rules, and to be the more inconvenient possible for them (including covering his allies, preventing a good sight to open fire, raming or blobking path to french) to impel them to open a green-on-green fire. Not only was this captain playing a more and more openly gree-on-green card as the fight was going on, but he also provoked other players to do so, by his words and by his attitude. And please, consider the few french shoots done against gameover as what they are : random fire that were supposed to hit ennemies, but damaged gameover instead because he was screening with his ship. Even this random fire landing on gameover could be consider as green-on-green by gameover because he was protecting danish and pirates players. In my eyes : gameover has done green-on-green on purpose and have been abbusive against the general rules, breaking the game rule right enough in hope his ennemy would infringe them even more. Thanks for your patience with my approximate english.