well i'm ona bout the bug where the game gives u full balance for a neutral u invade and take the city of, which can lead to a player winning a game way before he would normal and in some cases win a game he is far from winning/even might lose.

If it is voted out then if you beleive ur opponent has done it deliberately then u'll ahve to email the devs the replay. By deliberately i mean sending in a transport just to grab the city etc not invading with a dozon units, 1 of which happens to grab the city.

this poll will run for 7 days.

I fully agree with the talk here, and the fact that it is a bug, but I don't see how we can possibly enforce this! It would take a replay from every disputed game... and what do we do if someone misses the rule and does it anyway? Start the whole game over?

well we could make an unofficial rule ie it's frowned upon (and sen as not in the spirit of fun) but we can't stop people doing it if they want to.

This is an insiders ploy and is a manipulation of the system. newbies aren't aware of this usually. Basically you are not winning by eradicating your enemy, but you are flipping the system.

It is similar to dumping a single unit in a flagged country in order to grab the win. (like an entire country capitulating once a teenager with a gun shows up in the town square, a mile from the 3rd armored regiment HQ)

Gee it might make the games longer.. tough... if guerillas have already been called in the country have it count, but if they have not, have the balance reflect it.

I don't see problem in it. We could send message from tournament manager to ALL players, and if anyone will use banned trick, this game will be restarted.

But where is the seperation from a "legal" move and an "illegal" move. On Crateus you can accomplish this with 1 tank into many of the countries. Is this legal? One transport & one unit? Is this legal? Where is the cut off? Isn't the real problem here the least turn determining rule?

And this can be a legitmate tatic in real life. It is based on psychological warfare. If one side in a war is winning by alot and they were to launch an invasion like this into the Capitol of a country, that country may very well decide that it is better to just give in then die in the long run, it sets in motion people thinking about how hopeless it is to continue.

Chris

dont mix two different things.
invading enemy country and making it contested if it leads to drop of balance and win - is legal.
but invading a neutral country to asquire a full % from it and move balance is not legal because since there are guerillaz (though not ordered yet) and they not allow full control.
actually this comes from game being turn -based...if is was RTS - guerillas would pop up immediately but for convenince of turn based mode they move delayed till start of next opponents turn - but that delay not means you control country.

I have to agree with Maelstrom...no matter what we decide, we can't possibly enforce a rule like this. Even if we could enforce this, I do NOT need the extra work involved when I already have more than I can handle with running this war and making the next.

I think there will be not much extra work. Moderators should view problem battles only by request from lost players. And since there will be penalty for this trick (battle restart as Tiger suggests, or to treat battle as win but with infinity number of turns) it will be very rare.
If "Ban it unless the players has 200% balance already" rule wins, then lost players should provide in their request detailed balance calculation to moderators so the only work is to check it.

And the rule should be simple: if player captures neutral (i.e.guerilla are not raised yet) capital (with any unit) and wins on this turn then impose a penalty.

I don't mind either way.

I think this whole thing is ridiculous. I've won maybe 4% of my games doing that. Oh wow, a whole four percent, what a serious problem. It's a pretty damn rare situation, I mean, look how long it took you to see it and start complaining.

EDIT: Edited for language.

still don't see why it's such a ahrd thing just to fix the actual game, and i hadn;t brought it up before because i hadn't realised how easy it was to do. if i invade a neutral and grab the city and hit 300% then i actually appologise to my opponent, tho obviously i've already won if i'm that close. Have neer considered doing it on purpose as it's taking advantage of a bug in a game which is against my principles (no insult intended to ppl that do it on purpose, is just the way i do things)

but atm more people are agaisnt banning the bug but there's still plenty of time to get your vote in if you want to.

I don't think that is big problem for overall game. It is not easy to do that on every game ,every map to any opponent at a few turn(if that is already pass a lot of turn and someone do that to win, I think he/she had already nearly to win the game.)

To do that:
1) It needs good placement of SA in the game. (which surrounded by neutral countries)

2) Player disclose the correct SA (which got neutral country near that SA and not beside the enemy disclosed

SA. If not, he have to use money to fight/defend and not money for transport anymore)

3) The neutral country's capital must near enough to that player's SA.

4) The terran at there must suitable for transport to do full movement.

5) The size of the map must small (medium and large not easily to win by doing that at a few turn) (normally everyone will attack neutral and that is less chance that a lot of nearby country is your enemy disclose SA)

With these, you can see that it is not easy for that.

And for you all which have a lot of experience in the game and have good record/result on it, I want to ask you

all, you all play so many game, how many time do you all see your opponent using that to win you?

With your experience/tactic, if someone want to do that, if you careful enough, you should found out before he/she do that. (He/She must buy transport at end of his turn or move transport near that side, next turn is your time so you can do something on it) (This is one of the way used to force enemy follow his/her step in the game by giving that pressure to opponent)

This is game that when you can give more pressure to opponent that he/she give you, then you can have higher chance to win.

Once. In five hundred games, it's only happened to me once that I can recall...and it was a game that I was quite clearly losing.

the main problem is that with the current system the nubmer of turn u win/lose a game in matters so i'd expect to see this tactic used more and more

(Talking about the clan war)

Rocklizard and I were aware of the transport coup when the least turns rule was devised.

yah, the numbers of turn win/lose(clan war), but I already say that it is not easy to use that to win on the game. (It need that several factor to use that) so ban it is not required. (no one can easily use it to win the game). With your rich experience on the game, when opening, if you see that is chance for doing that, then you can prepare to it already.
If you set rules for that, then I think a lot of game will need someone to check back to decide who win or needed to re-play. (That is time-consuming and a lot of arguing)

I say play the game as it is now, and have it changed if it is truly a bug. This is the cleanest way and will prevent arguing.

Only twice in games have I seen a player in a better position lose to this tactic. Once against me and once against another player. Based on this, I think it is rare that a games course ends up different than it would have. The nice thing is that it makes it easy to end a game when you are dominant... I find little fun in pummeling an already defeated opponent.