Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Castello Haufniensis

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

14 Good

About Castello Haufniensis

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

155 profile views
  1. I tried 1234 but it did not work. I need pw to fix this @admin
  2. Ok...I need to make myself clear. I have said it a couple of times in this thread: This is not about the one case. The reason why I bring it up in the suggestion is because it is a question to the general function of the tribunal and the tools for discovering people using exploits...ok..clear..it is not about this one guy!!! And as I also stated: As players we do not posses the tools to investigate these things...we can take a screenshot that´s all: I cannot investigate because it is possible to delete a character and continue on with the same user. I tried to point out that if there are rul
  3. 1. You are agreeing that it is ok and not damaging to the spirit of the game, if I get my alt and the alts of 5 other in my clan to "sabotage" the PB of our competitors? The idea is hereby passed on to anyone who wants to pay a little extra to win. 2. What I am raising is a problem for the game. Instead of making a ridiculous insult you should consider that other games have been ruined by people being able to use exploits. When I am asking if there is a problem it is because I am asking for a fix. If you have no fix- fine! I would suggest however that you looked at how you could log info and
  4. Yes. But it is a question what is considered a proof that can lead to further investigation. Apparently a screenshot of "something happened" is not considered cause for a further investigation. Since a screenshot does not give an image of the intentions of the players I suggest, with all respect, that the moderators are not given the hard task of deciding this on their own, because if the corpus delicti can not be given via a screenshot, then the moderators quite frankly have no business playing judges. If however the ones given the task of judging in these cases have access to something bes
  5. I respect that. But a lot of the tribunal cases I have seen so far has been like this: 1. A player provides a screenshot stating that "something happened" 2. A moderator dismisses the case because the screenshot does not prove beyond any doubt that "something happened intentionally" Since "2" calls for a investigation into the subjective intention of the player that made "something happen" any case can be dismissed on the grounds of lacking evidence. If that is the case the tribunal is really just a thing that gives a false sense of justice and there is a deep problem if the devs. have
  6. There is no way to tell if it is one guy once (because you can just change the name of your alt). Your exaggerated metaphor is not what I am asking for. A simple history check or ip check if it is possible would not be hard to make. I have seen games destroyed my multiaccounting. This is not about this one case. It is about a general problem that could destroy the game, especially if PBs are going to have more impact as it has been advertised. You are not mistaken. But it has nothing to do with the problem. No matter what rate the ships are of you can destroy the enemy by joining them an
  7. I think the developers should take possible exploits of possible multiaccounting players more serious than right now. I just asked a question about a possible multiaccount in the tribunal: http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/13718-ilay-gb-multi-or-newb/ I am sure that OlavDeng is just answering according to the directions of the developers. But if this is the way cases are handled the game has a problem. The reason why I am asking the tribunal to take a look at a case is because I want someone to look into the history of an account and see if a suspicion is founded or unfounde
  8. Yesterday [RUS] clan bought a flag for Aves. We were 25 1st rates in the attack fleet. It is a bugger if a 1st rate is left outside for obvious reasons. After we had shampooed our herrings (entered combat) we realized that a player ILAY had joined the combat in a Cerb and a 1st rate was left outside. While it is possible that ILAY is just a eager newbie who did not know that he was taking up a spot in the PB it is suspicious that he surrendered after a few minutes without setting sails, so his only function in the combat was to take up a spot. Here is a screenshot of the combatant li
  9. I think you need more contingency in the "who can vote" arena. Reason: The ports closes to the capital will be taken first. The participants in the conquests near the capital has more "secure" holdings than the subsequent and thus have "safer" votes. At the same time the turnover of "old" players should be grater than the turnover of new players provided the game is able to fix the interest of players for a period of time (: players who have "been there-done that" are more prone to stop than new players who find everything new and exciting. Another effect of the conquest close to the capital
  10. I do not know if this already has been suggested, but I think this could be an idea for making the Port Battles more diverse and exiting for more people. I guess that the recent tweak of the xp/rank system has in part been made to allow more players to crew the 1st through 3rd rates that seem to be the requirement for participating in port battles. The result is a that a couple of thousand ships of the line now sail the Caribbean and a lot of admiral players are looking for challenges that are not rewarded by the game as it is now. As it is now the port battles are the main scene for co
  11. I crash (6 times in 20 min) both in harbor and in OW. When I start in OW (after crash and when I leave harbor) I start in the water without my ship. After about 10 secs my ship appears. When I crash the screen frezes and the bar says that the program is not responding. I then return to the "enter shard "PVPEu1"..." screen I tried lowering graphics to medium and updating drivers, restarted computer and steam.... Any other suggestions?
  12. I have been yo-yo ing in the login queue for the last 10 min ....from 121 to 80 and back to 90.....and then to 68.......
  • Create New...