I know a lot of games tend to lose players based on not only the community but the moderation and developers. We saw this in runescape where one developer started implementing his own code into the game without the other developers back checking what he was doing. He ended up putting some stuff in that other people were able to exploit for gain. I remember they shed a bunch of players during that controversy. Sometimes some people have to just put their emotions aside and not let it get to their ego.
I believe that guy also gave powers to his girlfriend?
That is a good game. I forgot you were also playing RS.
I was thinking of jed. I did hear of the recent one though.
Slagpit
Mar 31st 2024, 15:13:02
If you sincerely believe that the game admins are lying to you then you should obviously quit the game.
I'll be a bit argumentative again. When exactly was this golden age of player to player interaction? I first played on alliance around 2004. I remember alliances heavily pacting out and most countries doing all-X or only hitting untagged countries. I also remember land:land becoming the standard retal policy. Players themselves are the ones who were always pushing for less interaction. Just look at what happened to the team server. The last time I looked there was essentially zero landgrabs. Some clans even boasted about their 1:kill policies.
We aren't advertising because we don't have a good enough product yet. A few folks were kind enough to answer my question about what makes the alliance server special and they said that playing with friends is fun. But that's just a property of the server. Nearly any multiplayer team-based game will have that feature. No one said "it's fun to play with your friends to compete for average NW", "it's fun to win a war with your friends", or "it's fun to create a new clan with your friends and to politically outmaneuver other clans". That's a big problem in terms of player retention.
I think that when players advocate for chaos, they imagine themselves being on the giving end of chaos and other players being on the receiving end of it. In many cases that's only going to be fun for one party.
IMHO, the golden age was probably 1998-2003ish. The game saw several changes during that period as did the player base. The culture on the server started changing around 2002 with many wanting a heavy focus on netting and by this time every major alliance had turn by turn strats that proliferated throughout the community.
It was fun to be a part of an alliance, help it grow and help teach and protect the members
It was fun to make a landgrab and message the untagged country to join your alliance
It was fun to check the retal boards
It was fun to be a part of kill runs
It was fun to try different things while building your country, not quite knowing how it would turn out
It was fun to hunt multi's
It was fun to diplomatically interact
It was fun to build a better site than your competing alliances
It was fun to war for a cause, to die and restart as quickly as you could
It was probably fun to hit the top ten =)
Oh and it was fun to spam the AT boards
Fast forward to today and many of those things either don't apply or have been minimized. Time "in-game" has always been pretty minimal, especially after start up in peace-time. Maybe 20 mins a day if your researching bots to hit, likely no more than 10 min to run your turns. I'm sure we spend more time on our Discords, clan sites and the AT than we actually spend in-game.
I still enjoy the alliance server, mostly for the interaction with my alliance mates. I've found myself bored after using up my turns and played FFA server to fill in the gap. I use the express server to try out new builds and strats to use on alliance. 1A is a unique server, with aspects I don't think you can really get on the other servers. Some of the changes have been for neccessity due to the dwindling player base, some have been cultural made by the player base and some things haven't really changed for 25 years (for example, I use a strat from 2001 that works pretty well with just a few minor tweaks).
From the dev's point of view I'm sure the question is how do we drive more traffic to the site? If the "game" only takes 10 mins a day to play how much more traffic are you going to get even if you double or triple the current player base. Incorporating the tools, clan hosting and additional functions into the game will likely drive more traffic to the server AND as a result more players. If recruiting emails pointed them to join at clanx.earthempires.com vs , or checking stats at an earthempires link vs eestats.com, how much more traffic could be driven to the site.
I think you're on the right track, keep asking the questions. We are NOT ready to let this game die
The elephant in the room......
We have strayed from the original Earth 2025 and with each passing change (intended to increase player base), the player base has declined.
I am not into this whole community thing. I just come here to play a game. How are we supposed to recruit new players into a community that just wants to spend a few minutes/day hitting bots. I have recruited folks that won't stay for more than a day or two. They say it is too boring. Even online Chess matches require strategy. Chess requires offense and defense and sometimes you lose.....but like EE, you get to restart.
Make a server that leans on the original Earth 2025 and let's see what happens. Too many of you old folks no longer want to play that style of game. Real Life keeps you busy. Changes made to fit your current style of play will only result in the same old players from set to set.
Think aboout it.....old timers only return for war then leave when it goes back to just hitting bots.
P WeeZy should be along soon to confirm.
Exactly, 10/10
Mess with me you better kill me, or I'll just take your pride & joy and jack it up
(•_•)
Sometimes what is true is what someone with power wants to cover up to protect themself. It doesn't make them a better person by covering up the truth.
Slagpit
Mar 31st 2024, 15:13:02
If you sincerely believe that the game admins are lying to you then you should obviously quit the game.
Let's be honest, in the old days the political system was such that people moved to quickly resolve disputes because anyone could run a bunch of multies at any time, so the great bulk of FR was to get along so that nobody did.
Following that people were more or less willing to leave each other alone, which allowed the system to propagate.
But the current present state, where you can at any time ruin anyone's set for no reason, and it happens often, and it's now standard and accepted practice to run countries and entire alliances for no other reason, is a serious depredation of the state of the server.
You wouldn't play a slot machine that you thought was rigged against you. It's the same principle. Complaining that the game admins are corrupt while simultaneously playing the game makes no sense. Will you stop concern trolling now?
I'll be a bit argumentative again. When exactly was this golden age of player to player interaction? I first played on alliance around 2004. I remember alliances heavily pacting out and most countries doing all-X or only hitting untagged countries. I also remember land:land becoming the standard retal policy. Players themselves are the ones who were always pushing for less interaction. Just look at what happened to the team server. The last time I looked there was essentially zero landgrabs. Some clans even boasted about their 1:kill policies.
We aren't advertising because we don't have a good enough product yet. A few folks were kind enough to answer my question about what makes the alliance server special and they said that playing with friends is fun. But that's just a property of the server. Nearly any multiplayer team-based game will have that feature. No one said "it's fun to play with your friends to compete for average NW", "it's fun to win a war with your friends", or "it's fun to create a new clan with your friends and to politically outmaneuver other clans". That's a big problem in terms of player retention.
I think that when players advocate for chaos, they imagine themselves being on the giving end of chaos and other players being on the receiving end of it. In many cases that's only going to be fun for one party.
IMHO, the golden age was probably 1998-2003ish. The game saw several changes during that period as did the player base. The culture on the server started changing around 2002 with many wanting a heavy focus on netting and by this time every major alliance had turn by turn strats that proliferated throughout the community.
It was fun to be a part of an alliance, help it grow and help teach and protect the members
It was fun to make a landgrab and message the untagged country to join your alliance
It was fun to check the retal boards
It was fun to be a part of kill runs
It was fun to try different things while building your country, not quite knowing how it would turn out
It was fun to hunt multi's
It was fun to diplomatically interact
It was fun to build a better site than your competing alliances
It was fun to war for a cause, to die and restart as quickly as you could
It was probably fun to hit the top ten =)
Oh and it was fun to spam the AT boards
Fast forward to today and many of those things either don't apply or have been minimized. Time "in-game" has always been pretty minimal, especially after start up in peace-time. Maybe 20 mins a day if your researching bots to hit, likely no more than 10 min to run your turns. I'm sure we spend more time on our Discords, clan sites and the AT than we actually spend in-game.
I still enjoy the alliance server, mostly for the interaction with my alliance mates. I've found myself bored after using up my turns and played FFA server to fill in the gap. I use the express server to try out new builds and strats to use on alliance. 1A is a unique server, with aspects I don't think you can really get on the other servers. Some of the changes have been for neccessity due to the dwindling player base, some have been cultural made by the player base and some things haven't really changed for 25 years (for example, I use a strat from 2001 that works pretty well with just a few minor tweaks).
From the dev's point of view I'm sure the question is how do we drive more traffic to the site? If the "game" only takes 10 mins a day to play how much more traffic are you going to get even if you double or triple the current player base. Incorporating the tools, clan hosting and additional functions into the game will likely drive more traffic to the server AND as a result more players. If recruiting emails pointed them to join at clanx.earthempires.com vs , or checking stats at an earthempires link vs eestats.com, how much more traffic could be driven to the site.
I think you're on the right track, keep asking the questions. We are NOT ready to let this game die
The elephant in the room......
We have strayed from the original Earth 2025 and with each passing change (intended to increase player base), the player base has declined.
I am not into this whole community thing. I just come here to play a game. How are we supposed to recruit new players into a community that just wants to spend a few minutes/day hitting bots. I have recruited folks that won't stay for more than a day or two. They say it is too boring. Even online Chess matches require strategy. Chess requires offense and defense and sometimes you lose.....but like EE, you get to restart.
Make a server that leans on the original Earth 2025 and let's see what happens. Too many of you old folks no longer want to play that style of game. Real Life keeps you busy. Changes made to fit your current style of play will only result in the same old players from set to set.
Think aboout it.....old timers only return for war then leave when it goes back to just hitting bots.
P WeeZy should be along soon to confirm.
This is valuable feedback, thank you. I can't help but think of the Team server though. There are no bots there, there are no clans there with decades of history, and the resets are only one month in length so the stakes are lower. Due to how ghost acres work, countries can grab and retal and both countries can come out ahead. Yet no one really grabs. Apparently, some clans will kill you even if you do an informational spy op against them.
What gameplay change could be made to the Team server that would make players start landgrabbing each other again? I honestly can't think of one. Making explore rates go to 0? I don't know if even that would be enough.
Life bans on people who are talking smack? Forgiving those who took advantage of their position gained by having close relationships with owners/devs whatever the case was for their projection into being given exclusive access and then using it to cheat seems a bit worse to me, but what do I know, I just play the game
Is your complaint that your friend was treated too harshly or that people in the past weren't treated harshly enough?
I think part of the issue is that in the recent few years, given the small player base, the mod team has tried to be very transparent in what happens - which has been much appreciated. I'm honestly not sure how many friends Chevs has (he is polarizing to say the least, and many of us have had run ins with him on the solo servers that have not always been... ideal). But it's hard to argue that he didn't bring some new life to the game, even when the first iteration of ClanGDI removed a lot of the inherent interactions. The videos and forum activity were certainly something worth talking about, and even the opposing team seemed to enjoy it and provided their own video (I won't criticize it, because you won't see me creating any videos, but Chevs quality has certainly been unmatched).
I think given all of that, this is a strict departure - there's zero transparency, and to your question here: it seems inconsistent given the nature of what's been shared for the reasoning. Based on what others have mentioned on the forums, it seems like Chevs is willing to make whatever public, because he honestly doesn't know what this decade plus ban is for. Certainly sanctions were likely based around him, but given those were pulled back - and TC of all people, has returned with qz publicly stating in discord that 10 years seems enough, it's hard to imagine what sort of action would match this punishment so long after.
You've stated you don't need the forums to approve of your decision - and you're right, you're the administrator and developer of the game, but I just wanted to explain why so many people push back at this. There's so few people left, any sort of lifetime ban has a relatively large impact on the remaining teams, and Chevs - whether you like him or not - is pushing the game to have more people involved than it did, which seems like the point of these threads.
Edited By: Tertius on Mar 31st 2024, 23:49:28. Reason: words are hard
I haven’t played much on the team server but from what I’ve seen the primary purpose there is to fight. You need a QuickStart to be ready to battle as quickly as possible with the battles starting often very shortly after your out of protection.
I don’t know, but does anyone try and net on teams? I’m betting length of reset has a good deal to do with it as well as everyone being armed up to the max. You go breaking to someone’s house in a neighborhood you know is 99.999% armed.
Don’t think you can really compare the two, totally different animals. There are real psycho’s in teams, glad they’re not on the allian….oh hell never mind, M4D
Life bans on people who are talking smack? Forgiving those who took advantage of their position gained by having close relationships with owners/devs whatever the case was for their projection into being given exclusive access and then using it to cheat seems a bit worse to me, but what do I know, I just play the game
Is your complaint that your friend was treated too harshly or that people in the past weren't treated harshly enough?
I think part of the issue is that in the recent few years, given the small player base, the mod team has tried to be very transparent in what happens - which has been much appreciated. I'm honestly not sure how many friends Chevs has (he is polarizing to say the least, and many of us have had run ins with him on the solo servers that have not always been... ideal). But it's hard to argue that he didn't bring some new life to the game, even when the first iteration of ClanGDI removed a lot of the inherent interactions. The videos and forum activity were certainly something worth talking about, and even the opposing team seemed to enjoy it and provided their own video (I won't criticize it, because you won't see me creating any videos, but Chevs quality has certainly been unmatched).
I think given all of that, this is a strict departure - there's zero transparency, and to your question here: it seems inconsistent given the nature of what's been shared for the reasoning. Based on what others have mentioned on the forums, it seems like Chevs is willing to make whatever public, because he honestly doesn't know what this decade plus ban is for. Certainly sanctions were likely based around him, but given those were pulled back - and TC of all people, has returned with qz publicly stating in discord that 10 years seems enough, it's hard to imagine what sort of action would match this punishment so long after.
You've stated you don't need the forums to approve of your decision - and you're right, you're the administrator and developer of the game, but I just wanted to explain why so many people push back at this. There's so few people left, any sort of lifetime ban has a relatively large impact on the remaining teams, and Chevs - whether you like him or not - is pushing the game to have more people involved than it did, which seems like the point of these threads.
Allow me to share a perspective as an admin: Alliance Talk exists as a forum for players to lie to each other. Some players have literal decades of experience in spinning information to paint themselves or their clan in the best possible light. Do you know how many players private messaged me concerned about Chev's ban and asking for more details?
Zero.
I'm not saying that this applies to everyone who commented on it, but I suspect that most of the participants fall into two main camps. The first is just a group of players looking to be entertained by it. I recall someone making a supreme court analogy that I thought was pretty funny. The second group are his co-conspirators who already know exactly why he was banned. In fact, they probably know better than I do why he deserved to be banned. They celebrated and participated in the behavior that got him banned in the first place. Asking fake questions here is just another way to stir up trouble. No matter what evidence is presented, they will never publicly admit that banning Chevs was justified. Why would they? This is AT.
I haven’t played much on the team server but from what I’ve seen the primary purpose there is to fight. You need a QuickStart to be ready to battle as quickly as possible with the battles starting often very shortly after your out of protection.
I don’t know, but does anyone try and net on teams? I’m betting length of reset has a good deal to do with it as well as everyone being armed up to the max. You go breaking to someone’s house in a neighborhood you know is 99.999% armed.
Don’t think you can really compare the two, totally different animals. There are real psycho’s in teams, glad they’re not on the allian….oh hell never mind, M4D
Yes, it is a different server. I view Team as a much less complex environment than Alliance. If I had to state it simply, we've moved from 1:1 -> L:L -> 1:Kill -> 0:Kill. That's what those players chose for themselves. Game mechanics didn't get them there in the first place so I don't think that game mechanics can get them out of it.
Life bans on people who are talking smack? Forgiving those who took advantage of their position gained by having close relationships with owners/devs whatever the case was for their projection into being given exclusive access and then using it to cheat seems a bit worse to me, but what do I know, I just play the game
Is your complaint that your friend was treated too harshly or that people in the past weren't treated harshly enough?
I think part of the issue is that in the recent few years, given the small player base, the mod team has tried to be very transparent in what happens - which has been much appreciated. I'm honestly not sure how many friends Chevs has (he is polarizing to say the least, and many of us have had run ins with him on the solo servers that have not always been... ideal). But it's hard to argue that he didn't bring some new life to the game, even when the first iteration of ClanGDI removed a lot of the inherent interactions. The videos and forum activity were certainly something worth talking about, and even the opposing team seemed to enjoy it and provided their own video (I won't criticize it, because you won't see me creating any videos, but Chevs quality has certainly been unmatched).
I think given all of that, this is a strict departure - there's zero transparency, and to your question here: it seems inconsistent given the nature of what's been shared for the reasoning. Based on what others have mentioned on the forums, it seems like Chevs is willing to make whatever public, because he honestly doesn't know what this decade plus ban is for. Certainly sanctions were likely based around him, but given those were pulled back - and TC of all people, has returned with qz publicly stating in discord that 10 years seems enough, it's hard to imagine what sort of action would match this punishment so long after.
You've stated you don't need the forums to approve of your decision - and you're right, you're the administrator and developer of the game, but I just wanted to explain why so many people push back at this. There's so few people left, any sort of lifetime ban has a relatively large impact on the remaining teams, and Chevs - whether you like him or not - is pushing the game to have more people involved than it did, which seems like the point of these threads.
Allow me to share a perspective as an admin: Alliance Talk exists as a forum for players to lie to each other. Some players have literal decades of experience in spinning information to paint themselves or their clan in the best possible light. Do you know how many players private messaged me concerned about Chev's ban and asking for more details?
Zero.
I'm not saying that this applies to everyone who commented on it, but I suspect that most of the participants fall into two main camps. The first is just a group of players looking to be entertained by it. I recall someone making a supreme court analogy that I thought was pretty funny. The second group are his co-conspirators who already know exactly why he was banned. In fact, they probably know better than I do why he deserved to be banned. They celebrated and participated in the behavior that got him banned in the first place. Asking fake questions here is just another way to stir up trouble. No matter what evidence is presented, they will never publicly admit that banning Chevs was justified. Why would they? This is AT.
I think we all realize AT has long been light on truth and heavy on spin (spin dagga spin) - and while I'd like to think a number of us try to be reasonable and honest, you're right that's not always the case for players. That said, I'd also argue that the expectation for admins within the admin role (and not as an alliance leader) defaults to honesty. I can't speak to his co-conspirators (it seemed like the Bomb group was always a smaller group, and I don't think Weezy was part of it) but there's definitely a number in the middle of the pack who would appreciate at least some evidence. Permanent bans for doxxing etc have occurred, and I think people were pretty reasonable about it. With TC, Pang came out and shared the details that were known and the repercussions. If there's an old thread about this somewhere, maybe that would help, but I think this happened while I was away and given someone purposefully unbanned him, it's just a little unusual to see that unilaterally reversed.
I do appreciate the renewed efforts you're putting into the game, the responses you've provided, and your perspective, but just wanted to share the neutral view too.
For teams - I agree with Req, there have been a number of netting groups. Typically, if you want to net, you have to have fought for a pact against the warring teams; it has it's own version of politics, but there have been a lot of successful groups on both sides, a lot of commentary when Blackhole came to upend things (including making enemies of EVERYONE), and some tight netting competitions for #1 and ANW (along with some really nice team efforts with mass FA etc, which is a little more interesting when there's no single largest clan).
Allow me to share a perspective as an admin: Alliance Talk exists as a forum for players to lie to each other. Some players have literal decades of experience in spinning information to paint themselves or their clan in the best possible light. Do you know how many players private messaged me concerned about Chev's ban and asking for more details?
Zero.
I'm not saying that this applies to everyone who commented on it, but I suspect that most of the participants fall into two main camps. The first is just a group of players looking to be entertained by it. I recall someone making a supreme court analogy that I thought was pretty funny. The second group are his co-conspirators who already know exactly why he was banned. In fact, they probably know better than I do why he deserved to be banned. They celebrated and participated in the behavior that got him banned in the first place. Asking fake questions here is just another way to stir up trouble. No matter what evidence is presented, they will never publicly admit that banning Chevs was justified. Why would they? This is AT.
What? I've seen logs from at least 3 different people posted in discord asking both you and other mods why Chevs was banned. Logs with you responding and dodging every attempt to give an answer. Are you saying those people don't count because they are "co-conspirators?" Am I co-conspirator? Because I've played with Chevs on and off since returning to the game and I have no idea why he was banned.
You talk about lying on AT in one breath while making lies of your own in the next. I guess you think since you've banned most of the others who have asked you in private already, no one was left to call you out on this? I guess I'll be banned next. What a joke.
Life bans on people who are talking smack? Forgiving those who took advantage of their position gained by having close relationships with owners/devs whatever the case was for their projection into being given exclusive access and then using it to cheat seems a bit worse to me, but what do I know, I just play the game
Is your complaint that your friend was treated too harshly or that people in the past weren't treated harshly enough?
I think part of the issue is that in the recent few years, given the small player base, the mod team has tried to be very transparent in what happens - which has been much appreciated. I'm honestly not sure how many friends Chevs has (he is polarizing to say the least, and many of us have had run ins with him on the solo servers that have not always been... ideal). But it's hard to argue that he didn't bring some new life to the game, even when the first iteration of ClanGDI removed a lot of the inherent interactions. The videos and forum activity were certainly something worth talking about, and even the opposing team seemed to enjoy it and provided their own video (I won't criticize it, because you won't see me creating any videos, but Chevs quality has certainly been unmatched).
I think given all of that, this is a strict departure - there's zero transparency, and to your question here: it seems inconsistent given the nature of what's been shared for the reasoning. Based on what others have mentioned on the forums, it seems like Chevs is willing to make whatever public, because he honestly doesn't know what this decade plus ban is for. Certainly sanctions were likely based around him, but given those were pulled back - and TC of all people, has returned with qz publicly stating in discord that 10 years seems enough, it's hard to imagine what sort of action would match this punishment so long after.
You've stated you don't need the forums to approve of your decision - and you're right, you're the administrator and developer of the game, but I just wanted to explain why so many people push back at this. There's so few people left, any sort of lifetime ban has a relatively large impact on the remaining teams, and Chevs - whether you like him or not - is pushing the game to have more people involved than it did, which seems like the point of these threads.
Allow me to share a perspective as an admin: Alliance Talk exists as a forum for players to lie to each other. Some players have literal decades of experience in spinning information to paint themselves or their clan in the best possible light. Do you know how many players private messaged me concerned about Chev's ban and asking for more details?
Zero.
I'm not saying that this applies to everyone who commented on it, but I suspect that most of the participants fall into two main camps. The first is just a group of players looking to be entertained by it. I recall someone making a supreme court analogy that I thought was pretty funny. The second group are his co-conspirators who already know exactly why he was banned. In fact, they probably know better than I do why he deserved to be banned. They celebrated and participated in the behavior that got him banned in the first place. Asking fake questions here is just another way to stir up trouble. No matter what evidence is presented, they will never publicly admit that banning Chevs was justified. Why would they? This is AT.
The AT has ALWAYS been a smack board, full of fluff, diplomatic maneuvering and lies (kind of like CNN). It's also a useful tool for us to post official notices and announcements. The AT has been a source of headaches for any HFA since day one as members often come and flame on at will, but that's part of the game.
Not everything on AT is lies, again it's a fundamental aspect of this server. As an Admin, what you don't see are the real politics behind the scenes, the negotiations, deals and personal interactions between the alliances. The AT is just our Anderson Cooper we use to try and spin any situation.
I don't know your history Slagpit, not trying to be pissy, just curious have you ever really played on the server or just experienced it from the admin perspective?
As someone that has financially contributed to the game (EE Patron next to my name), I have a small stake investment in the game.
slagpit,
I vote to free Chevs unless there are evidence that points to why he should incur as lifetime ban. All I see is "he said she said hearsay" on why he was banned. You want to attract more players to the game, seems counter-intuitive to ban existing players. Especially one that keeps the game interesting.
From what I've seen from Chevs since he returned to the game, he hasn't done anything that I considered to be atrocious in nature enough to incur a lifetime ban.
Why couldn't you just make a country and fight him instead?
Coalie, MBA B.Acc
Mercenaries for Hire
Deputy Commander
That's a post on AT rankings, from his profile he has had 2 countries in alliance both in round 69, one dead (from what appears to be self deletion) and 1 that never made it out of protection
Allow me to share a perspective as an admin: Alliance Talk exists as a forum for players to lie to each other. Some players have literal decades of experience in spinning information to paint themselves or their clan in the best possible light. Do you know how many players private messaged me concerned about Chev's ban and asking for more details?
Zero.
I'm not saying that this applies to everyone who commented on it, but I suspect that most of the participants fall into two main camps. The first is just a group of players looking to be entertained by it. I recall someone making a supreme court analogy that I thought was pretty funny. The second group are his co-conspirators who already know exactly why he was banned. In fact, they probably know better than I do why he deserved to be banned. They celebrated and participated in the behavior that got him banned in the first place. Asking fake questions here is just another way to stir up trouble. No matter what evidence is presented, they will never publicly admit that banning Chevs was justified. Why would they? This is AT.
What? I've seen logs from at least 3 different people posted in discord asking both you and other mods why Chevs was banned. Logs with you responding and dodging every attempt to give an answer. Are you saying those people don't count because they are "co-conspirators?" Am I co-conspirator? Because I've played with Chevs on and off since returning to the game and I have no idea why he was banned.
You talk about lying on AT in one breath while making lies of your own in the next. I guess you think since you've banned most of the others who have asked you in private already, no one was left to call you out on this? I guess I'll be banned next. What a joke.
Okay, go ahead and post the logs here. I just checked my private messages again. I see no messages from players who initially reached out to me to ask about Chevs. It's possible that I forgot or missed a message, but I seriously do not know what you're talking about.
Life bans on people who are talking smack? Forgiving those who took advantage of their position gained by having close relationships with owners/devs whatever the case was for their projection into being given exclusive access and then using it to cheat seems a bit worse to me, but what do I know, I just play the game
Is your complaint that your friend was treated too harshly or that people in the past weren't treated harshly enough?
I think part of the issue is that in the recent few years, given the small player base, the mod team has tried to be very transparent in what happens - which has been much appreciated. I'm honestly not sure how many friends Chevs has (he is polarizing to say the least, and many of us have had run ins with him on the solo servers that have not always been... ideal). But it's hard to argue that he didn't bring some new life to the game, even when the first iteration of ClanGDI removed a lot of the inherent interactions. The videos and forum activity were certainly something worth talking about, and even the opposing team seemed to enjoy it and provided their own video (I won't criticize it, because you won't see me creating any videos, but Chevs quality has certainly been unmatched).
I think given all of that, this is a strict departure - there's zero transparency, and to your question here: it seems inconsistent given the nature of what's been shared for the reasoning. Based on what others have mentioned on the forums, it seems like Chevs is willing to make whatever public, because he honestly doesn't know what this decade plus ban is for. Certainly sanctions were likely based around him, but given those were pulled back - and TC of all people, has returned with qz publicly stating in discord that 10 years seems enough, it's hard to imagine what sort of action would match this punishment so long after.
You've stated you don't need the forums to approve of your decision - and you're right, you're the administrator and developer of the game, but I just wanted to explain why so many people push back at this. There's so few people left, any sort of lifetime ban has a relatively large impact on the remaining teams, and Chevs - whether you like him or not - is pushing the game to have more people involved than it did, which seems like the point of these threads.
Allow me to share a perspective as an admin: Alliance Talk exists as a forum for players to lie to each other. Some players have literal decades of experience in spinning information to paint themselves or their clan in the best possible light. Do you know how many players private messaged me concerned about Chev's ban and asking for more details?
Zero.
I'm not saying that this applies to everyone who commented on it, but I suspect that most of the participants fall into two main camps. The first is just a group of players looking to be entertained by it. I recall someone making a supreme court analogy that I thought was pretty funny. The second group are his co-conspirators who already know exactly why he was banned. In fact, they probably know better than I do why he deserved to be banned. They celebrated and participated in the behavior that got him banned in the first place. Asking fake questions here is just another way to stir up trouble. No matter what evidence is presented, they will never publicly admit that banning Chevs was justified. Why would they? This is AT.
The AT has ALWAYS been a smack board, full of fluff, diplomatic maneuvering and lies (kind of like CNN). It's also a useful tool for us to post official notices and announcements. The AT has been a source of headaches for any HFA since day one as members often come and flame on at will, but that's part of the game.
Not everything on AT is lies, again it's a fundamental aspect of this server. As an Admin, what you don't see are the real politics behind the scenes, the negotiations, deals and personal interactions between the alliances. The AT is just our Anderson Cooper we use to try and spin any situation.
I don't know your history Slagpit, not trying to be pissy, just curious have you ever really played on the server or just experienced it from the admin perspective?
I remember obeying an "AT ban" back about two decades ago? I've also done FA work myself. As I said, I was providing an admin perspective. Ordinary interactions between players on this board don't really concern me.
When players post here about admin corruption or about how they were deleted even though they weren't cheating, they are almost always lying.
Tertius, posting proof is going to result in one of three responses:
1) people claiming that it's fake
2) people claiming that it's not that big of a deal
3) people making claims about other players and whining that they weren't punished
If you personally have concerns that something is going wrong here then send me a PM and I'll talk to you about it.
The link that Requiem (dunno why he's saying he isn't welcome) shared made me feel nostalgic. AT trolls were so much better back in the day. These new ones make me feel like I'm engaging with some kind of half-baked AI.
I'll go ahead and share what I think is a fun little story. During that round I found that the bomb's tag was available so I stole it. Then ZEN wanted to tag up so I let him. Soon other players started tagging up too, having no idea that I was the tag admin. I remember Chevs being killed and he asked for me FA through an ingame message. I told him that as president of the bomb he should be sending me FA instead. Then his country died.
I'll go ahead and share what I think is a fun little story. During that round I found that the bomb's tag was available so I stole it. Then ZEN wanted to tag up so I let him. Soon other players started tagging up too, having no idea that I was the tag admin. I remember Chevs being killed and he asked for me FA through an ingame message. I told him that as president of the bomb he should be sending me FA instead. Then his country died.
Good times.
So as a game dev, you took the time to troll him and then banned him later in the same set? That’s some terd crawlin level stuff right there.
No wonder he spoke out against corruption. As somebody that has financially contributed (ee Patron) to this game, I am dissapointed to see this kind of behavior.
Edited By: Coalie on Apr 1st 2024, 11:54:10
Coalie, MBA B.Acc
Mercenaries for Hire
Deputy Commander
As someone that has financially contributed to the game (EE Patron next to my name), I have a small stake investment in the game.
slagpit,
I vote to free Chevs unless there are evidence that points to why he should incur as lifetime ban. All I see is "he said she said hearsay" on why he was banned. You want to attract more players to the game, seems counter-intuitive to ban existing players. Especially one that keeps the game interesting.
From what I've seen from Chevs since he returned to the game, he hasn't done anything that I considered to be atrocious in nature enough to incur a lifetime ban.
Why couldn't you just make a country and fight him instead?
Just because you wasted your money, does not give you a better stake in this game :P
Just shows that you met the game quota under the ADA.
Still avoiding the elephant in the room......
We have strayed from the original Earth 2025 and with each passing change (intended to increase player base), the player base has declined.
I am not into this whole community thing. I just come here to play a game. How are we supposed to recruit new players into a community that just wants to spend a few minutes/day hitting bots. I have recruited folks that won't stay for more than a day or two. They say it is too boring. Even online Chess matches require strategy. Chess requires offense and defense and sometimes you lose.....but like EE, you get to restart.
Make a server that leans on the original Earth 2025 and let's see what happens. Too many of you old folks no longer want to play that style of game. Real Life keeps you busy. Changes made to fit your current style of play will only result in the same old players from set to set.
Think aboout it.....old timers only return for war then leave when it goes back to just hitting bots.
Tertius, you son of a gun. How DARE you say I made enemies with everyone. Braeden was kinda a friend one time. Milkman loves me so much he started using my RL name in game. I got the leaders of Darkness and LaF to fight over me. Doug was my best friend until I outed him as duplicitous, then he lost his mind, self-imploded, and quit the game. Even Dark Demon speaks to me occasionally even though he said to me 'never message me again'. Does that sound like someone who has made enemies of EVERYONE?!?
Tertius, you son of a gun. How DARE you say I made enemies with everyone. Braeden was kinda a friend one time. Milkman loves me so much he started using my RL name in game. I got the leaders of Darkness and LaF to fight over me. Doug was my best friend until I outed him as duplicitous, then he lost his mind, self-imploded, and quit the game. Even Dark Demon speaks to me occasionally even though he said to me 'never message me again'. Does that sound like someone who has made enemies of EVERYONE?!?
Hell Symba and Sui are like my bff's. Ask them!
You forgot Coalie was another person for a bit as your friend.
<cloud-rasp> It’s real bad
<cloud-rasp> DDOSing my DESTOCK
Kahuna: Ya you just wrote the fkn equation, not helping me at all. Lol n I hated algebra.
Life bans on people who are talking smack? Forgiving those who took advantage of their position gained by having close relationships with owners/devs whatever the case was for their projection into being given exclusive access and then using it to cheat seems a bit worse to me, but what do I know, I just play the game
Is your complaint that your friend was treated too harshly or that people in the past weren't treated harshly enough?
I think part of the issue is that in the recent few years, given the small player base, the mod team has tried to be very transparent in what happens - which has been much appreciated. I'm honestly not sure how many friends Chevs has (he is polarizing to say the least, and many of us have had run ins with him on the solo servers that have not always been... ideal). But it's hard to argue that he didn't bring some new life to the game, even when the first iteration of ClanGDI removed a lot of the inherent interactions. The videos and forum activity were certainly something worth talking about, and even the opposing team seemed to enjoy it and provided their own video (I won't criticize it, because you won't see me creating any videos, but Chevs quality has certainly been unmatched).
I think given all of that, this is a strict departure - there's zero transparency, and to your question here: it seems inconsistent given the nature of what's been shared for the reasoning. Based on what others have mentioned on the forums, it seems like Chevs is willing to make whatever public, because he honestly doesn't know what this decade plus ban is for. Certainly sanctions were likely based around him, but given those were pulled back - and TC of all people, has returned with qz publicly stating in discord that 10 years seems enough, it's hard to imagine what sort of action would match this punishment so long after.
You've stated you don't need the forums to approve of your decision - and you're right, you're the administrator and developer of the game, but I just wanted to explain why so many people push back at this. There's so few people left, any sort of lifetime ban has a relatively large impact on the remaining teams, and Chevs - whether you like him or not - is pushing the game to have more people involved than it did, which seems like the point of these threads.
Allow me to share a perspective as an admin: Alliance Talk exists as a forum for players to lie to each other. Some players have literal decades of experience in spinning information to paint themselves or their clan in the best possible light. Do you know how many players private messaged me concerned about Chev's ban and asking for more details?
Zero.
I'm not saying that this applies to everyone who commented on it, but I suspect that most of the participants fall into two main camps. The first is just a group of players looking to be entertained by it. I recall someone making a supreme court analogy that I thought was pretty funny. The second group are his co-conspirators who already know exactly why he was banned. In fact, they probably know better than I do why he deserved to be banned. They celebrated and participated in the behavior that got him banned in the first place. Asking fake questions here is just another way to stir up trouble. No matter what evidence is presented, they will never publicly admit that banning Chevs was justified. Why would they? This is AT.
Because transparency is important, especially in a community where the majority of us have been here for decades, because the game is a dying breed, because we're all very small community, because Chevs is one of the mods public enemy #1 and is SUS AF he got banned for so long especially when a guy that screwed everyone's trust is now back in the game and buddy buddy with higher ups.
Yeah you don't owe an explanation but at the same time you should shine a light, who did he verbally murder?
Edited By: KoHeartsGPA on Apr 1st 2024, 18:05:22
Mess with me you better kill me, or I'll just take your pride & joy and jack it up
(•_•)
KoHeartsGPA, can you be specific in what you're saying instead of alluding to some kind of conspiracy in general terms? I don't know what you're talking about. I don't follow politics on the Alliance server. Who is "a guy"?
KoHeartsGPA, can you be specific in what you're saying instead of alluding to some kind of conspiracy in general terms? I don't know what you're talking about. I don't follow politics on the Alliance server. Who is "a guy"?
So you didn't read the post you replied to from Tertius? The "a guy" is TC.
Mess with me you better kill me, or I'll just take your pride & joy and jack it up
(•_•)
1. Slag did reach out to me to see if I wanted to say anything on Chevs' behalf. And I told him no. I would rather Chevs quit playing this game. It is a waste of his time and as I actually care about his well being and his growing family, I will not do anything to assist in the continuation of him playing this game, but if he wants to waste his time on it that is his choice.
2. Slag gets a lot of heat on things, but it is because he is the only one that makes a definitive decision. The rest of the developers are checked out and non-committal. I don't blame them. This aggression towards Slag, in my opinion, isn't warranted. Whatever your opinions of the guy, he at least cares enough to engage with us a-holes.
3. To Slag - I consider the conversations you and I had as private and will not reveal the things we spoke about. Just as I consider my relationship with the very few people I was close with in this game as also private. I personally do NOT think Chevs deserves to be permabanned (with a caveat as shared below) as it stands. Do I think he is difficult to deal with? Yes. Do I think he did some of the things mentioned? Yes. I was there with him. Do I think that he did anything that is worth a life time ban? Depends. It is up to the staff to make that decision, but if he did then so did MULTIPLE people who are still playing this game. MYSELF included. I just think that it should be fair, and people who have done the same or WORSE things should have also been perma-banned. The fact that Chevs doesn't actually lie to anyone is a detriment to him and why I think he is being singled out. He might debate a rule, he might exploit a loose definition of that rule, but he doesn't lie. It is one of the things I actually respect about the man. That and he is a good father, husband, and human. Which can't be said about most of the people who play this game.
4. Lastly. There is one person who is involved in this game that above all else, is a cancer. This person has continuously been in the middle of most of these issues. This person lies. This person defends you on the forums (SLAG) but lies and talks fluff behind your back. At first I respected the way this person played the game, but once I found out that it actually affected people's lives and well being....it wasn't acceptable to me anymore. I refused to talk to this person. I refuse to engage with this person. I have refused to acknowledge this person's existence until now. Slag, this person is the only reason anything was ever said about you. This person is the only reason why Chevs lost his cool and said things he shouldn't have (and I agree with his reasons). This person is the only reason why I don't feel this game is worth participating in. I will not name this person as I feel it makes me just as bad as this person. But for the people who know, they know.
I'd like to see EVERYONE who has violated rules of this nature to also receive perma-bans. It doesn't seem right to pick and choose just because you don't like the person. I am willing to put my status here in jeopardy to see equal actions if that is what it takes. I also understand if the admin group (Slag) can't go back on this decision for whatever reason. In that instance, I think I understand how things are going to work and I feel that this game is no longer in line with how I want to spend my time.
KoHeartsGPA, can you be specific in what you're saying instead of alluding to some kind of conspiracy in general terms? I don't know what you're talking about. I don't follow politics on the Alliance server. Who is "a guy"?
So you didn't read the post you replied to from Tertius? The "a guy" is TC.
Tertius screwed everyone's trust and is now back in the game and buddy buddy with higher ups? That's news to me...
I'm happy to engage with you on this, but I really need you to explain it in a simple and clear way to me.
KoHeartsGPA, can you be specific in what you're saying instead of alluding to some kind of conspiracy in general terms? I don't know what you're talking about. I don't follow politics on the Alliance server. Who is "a guy"?
So you didn't read the post you replied to from Tertius? The "a guy" is TC.
Tertius screwed everyone's trust and is now back in the game and buddy buddy with higher ups? That's news to me...
I'm happy to engage with you on this, but I really need you to explain it in a simple and clear way to me.
Yeah no, maybe you need to communicate with the rest of your team instead of attempting to troll me, have a good day Sir.
Mess with me you better kill me, or I'll just take your pride & joy and jack it up
(•_•)
EE Patron
, or checking stats at an earthempires link vs eestats.com, how much more traffic could be driven to the site.