legal/ not legal?!

As long as no fleet info is exchanged, which is clearly against the rules and fairness, it shouldnt matter if the person left for 1 second or 1 year. That goes for the example here and the example Rag gave, both of which I know the details of. And as far as I can tell, neither case had any fleet passing. So I`ll disagree that if you leave a fed and then hit former fedmates it`s usually illegal. Maybe Empire A doesnt like us anymore, I dont know why he left. If he were to leave, do what he did, and then join back up again, then yes, that would be a fairly obvious cheap tactic. But he`s not coming back, and he wasnt given fleet info. If I were to leave my fed, it would be ridiculous if I couldnt attack them for sme specified periiod. If I was using inside info then yes, I`d be cheating. But you cant assume that`s what`s happening and make a rule restricting it. My two cents, maybe only worth one.

Also, after someone has authoritatively ruled on this matter......

PUT THE RULE IN A STICKY THREAD FOR ALL TO SEE, ALONG WITH ALL THE OTHER UNWRITTEN RULES OR APPLICATIONS OF WRITTEN RULES!!

We all know the house rules are outdated or involve applications of house rules that are not immediately obvious for even veteran players, such as this case here.

I agree with Crack here. If you can`t hit someone who`s been in your fed, who can you hit?
And what about being in a fed who is allied to other feds, can you hit within your alliance?

If it is not legal, then i want to know the exact day count until it IS legal to hit a former fed member. 2 days? 5 days? 2 weeks? a Year?

Cuz obviously there IS a date of expiration, is there not PP? After all, it was COMPLETELY legal for Accord to hit Deiloche 5 days after she left the MOB to win a cluster from him based on inactivity.

If that is so, then after 5 day mark, former fed members are FREE GAME like everyone else to hit and win clusters off of or what not.

And if it is NOT legal, is the former fed member hit OBLIGATED or LIABLE for a potential suspension if he/she does not immediately report the violator for this thing and claim that this was against his wishes? Or is only the person making the hits liable for a suspension/ban?

Im going to jump on all feds.. Make sure no one can hit me.. Nice rule..

If it involves fedmates leaving a fed and hitting former fedmates, it`s usually illegal.
If you have to post on the forum asking about it, it`s usually illegal.

Since this has two of the possibilities of illegality attached to it, I`m going to guess it`s illegal.

heres another theory one empire A is enslaved by emipre b for baby empire A sees his other slaves and to annoy him enslaves his other slaves without fleet info or even freeing the slaves after and his victory is enhanded by empire B for babys chilish nature -__-

all I can say is lol at the baby

*implodes brain*

staff should give warnings a couple times before harsh punishment? cuz thats totally not how it works now right? <-- just made my sarcasm meter explode..in case urs isnt working :P

You got a point grant, but like I said before, staff needs to be better about giving warnings first if something like this happens. Thats the middle point. If the same player has had multiple warnings, thats when you escalate.

Hopeless: The game community is already very small. Thus, if we tighten rule enforcement we would probably zone in on enough innocent people to actually affect the core of the game community.

If the game community was larger, then I think that being more harsh with rule enforcement would be appropriate because although you will be banning/suspending way more players, there will be lots more to take their place.

Either way, PLEASE, either an authoritative guide like SD or admin plz weigh in on this.

Whatever happened to just giving people a warning first time? It`s always the extremes of either letting people by or banning people outright. Use it as a teaching moment, ya know? If the same empire gets warned several times, that`s when you should consider suspending or banning him.

@ MajorDinero....in your opinion is it better to ban innocent people, to get the true bad guys, or is it better to error on the side that MAY let cheaters get by?

I got another theoretical question PP for you. Suppose, in your theoretical situation, empire B did not tell empires C and D or the rest of his fed what he was going to do until after the fact? Suppose Empire B was prone to this sort of behavior of acting on his own?

Meh, enslaving with built fleets is one thing that are unknown, but it is easy to tell a person without msn/fed pms or whatever that he has built. I just find it more odd about seeing 2 enslavements in one day at near the same time, yet what bugs me more is the early dp exits.

Nonetheless it shouldn`t be legal, but meh Ill let the admin`s look into it.

lol @ Nihilim. the way you put it its totally illegal i suppose. but if G were to have a tasty fert it would be legal thats for sure...

Stephen = management, lol

Also it does seem that BW is less extreme when it comes to punishing ppl...I get the feeling that maru would have banned a lot more people. BUT at the expense of banning innocent people.

So, overall it`s good for the game...we`re letting some cheating behavior slide, but at least we`re not banning innocent people.