Questioning the 'legality' of port flipping event

[JCDC]

I dont know if this is against the rules or not, its not clear. i suspect it might be a 'legal' manipulation of the game mechanics but if it is i suggest it needs to become 'illegal'.

 

The event i refer to is the flipping backwards and forwards of ports between the french and spanish around Tombado. We british had driven the french out of pananma and honduras over 3 weeks. they decided to move north to escape and took a spanish port (Conttoy). given that the spanish escorted them there and sat by idly while the port was captured we can safely say this was an agreed transfer. the spanish and french have been fighitng together very closely in this war and there is little doubt they are not hostile to each other.

 

This is all well and good, i dont disagree that one nation should be able to give another a port, it happens all the time.

 

The problem was that the next day we the British were obviously going to attempt to capture Conttoy. it was one of two remaining French ports. the Spanish (who are as we have seen, not hostile to the French and work with them very closely) launched a conquest flag on Conttoy while we were preparing our assault. shortly before this the French had taken Mugeres and also launched assault flags on conil and cuyo (Spanish ports being given to france). due to the timing of the windows, and the relative distances involved it was nearly impossible for us to prevent any of this from happening. The effect was that we were unable to assault either mugeres or Conttoy. the Spanish and French arranged the port timers and flipping of ports to mean that they were unassailable, invulnerable. you can almost sail between them under invulnerability timer so we had all of 2 minutes to organize a response before the battle would start and we would be locked out.

 

​

Mugeres captured first, then French launch flags from Conttoy, then Spanish launch to retake it 3 mins later. the timing is crucial and obviously co-ordinated. it prevents us doing anything about it and ensures that the Spanish regain conttoy as soon as possible after French assaults launched.

 

​​

 

This has clearly had the effect of making defeat of the French impossible. the conquest mechanics appear to have been manipulated between these two nations to make that the case. of course I cant prove intent, that would be impossible unless I was on their TS when they arranged it. but I doubt anyone is going to claim those were contested and hostile actions. the French and Spanish fleets sail together as one. so unless this is just co-incidence or they just changed their mind over which port they wanted and just happened to swap simultaneously I cant see how this is not deliberate. I am sure we will get a creative answer to that which cannot be proved.

 

So my question is: Is this allowed?

 

If it is not, please do something about it.

If it is allowed, please make it unallowed. we cant have partner nations working together to make themselves invincible, it will break the game.

 

I want to keep this factual but I must say I am very dissapointed at this misuse of game mechanics because the French have frequently and with great gusto accused us of unfair play by using timers that aren't totally convenient for them. we have been branded by one French participant 'trollexploiters' for not sticking to their very narrow definition of what 'prime time' is for this war. now these same French gentlemen (who have mostly been extremely well behaved and courteous I must add) have used what I regard as a blatant exploit. The hypocrisy is painful and it makes inconvenient timers look very minor indeed. this is not making things legitimately inconventient for their enemies, this is making it impossible to defeat them through misuse of game mechanics not military action. this cannot be allowed to continue.

 

This is a great shame as a way to end the war, I have enjoyed it very much, the French have played very well and been great enemies. this and the (now very hypocritical) forum flaming against us spoils it a bit. sad.

 

Thanks

Edited March 30, 2016 by JCDC

[JCDC]

my post is clear

 

1. what happened is very clearly explained

2. who did it are some French and Spanish clans but specifically you can see the names of the flag carriers on the screenshot I posted. if you really need me to spell it out for you I accuse rocko1980 (who is part of EI clan, who are thus 'co-defendants') as the flag carrier of conttoy who is the main defendant.

3. specifically I am accusing them of abusing the conquest mechanics to create invincible ports and prevent us from playing the game. I believe this might be seen as 'illegal' but I am not sure, which is why I am asking the question

 

 

That information is all in what I posted.

Edited March 30, 2016 by SteelSandwich
Removed offtopic part

[maturin]

Wait, so the Spanish took Contoy, but the French didn't take Mugeres?

 

Shouldn't it be obvious that the Spanish intended all along to loan ports to the French as they move up the coast into empty territory to build themselves a base? The Spanish always intended to take Contoy back, but the British assault forced their hands. Think about what you are saying here... The Spanish should have seen the enemy coming, and refrain from locking the gate?

 

This is a non-issue.

 

Now, if the French and Spanish repeatedly swapped Mugeres and Contoy so that neither could ever be attacked, I would be in agreement with JCDC.

[SteelSandwich]

Current assault flag mechanics are outdated and have proven to be inefficient in testing. It was, and is, almost impossible to prove malicious intent in regard to abuse. In the war & peace patch the assault flag will most likely be disabled and replaced with something better. Yet, if enough proof/evidence is gathered, actions will be taken.

 

Now, if I look at the screenshots provided, all I see is that the French are taking some Spanish ports and the Spanish are taking some of the French ports. I don't however see the evidence supporting repeated swapping, which you are referring to.

 

As pointed out by Maturin above, maybe an arrangement has been made where France is to move into further away lands.

I recall a similar event happening when the French jumped past the Dutch to move into Panama.

 

Unless you have additional evidence, this claim does not stand. You can message me with additional evidence to support your claim, until then, this tribunal is dismissed.