WG will there be any new rules in regards against CV truces?

[Mr_Alex]

Does anyone know if WG will make any rules against CV truces or even make it become a banable offense?

[KingCakeBaby]

Explain.

[BelgaraththeSorcerer]

I have seen these happen once.... in 1900+ games, it doesnt seem like a major problem at least to me

[The_GoDDfather]

You can't really monitor that....

[sulghunter331]

Explain.

 

The CVs on both teams agree not to try to snipe each other, so that they can focus on sinking surface combatants, instead of having to defend themselves.

[Mr_Alex]

Explain.

 

CV truces being made obvious is a good example where players use the chat to make their intentions obvious

[Macabe]

You can't really monitor that....

 

You can report them for battle rigging if they are talking in chat.

[StrykerNC]

 

The CVs on both teams agree not to try to snipe each other, so that they can focus on sinking surface combatants, instead of having to defend themselves.

 

Yep. Usually in chat, at the beginning.. It's happen to me only once in my Ranger.   I can't see why it would be an issue that WG would worry about.

[StingRayOne]

this is the second post today, the last post was four pages.

[suleiman71]

this is the second post today, the last post was four pages.

 

And this type of topic is one which incites a tad more than just regular debating...unfortunatly.

[Mason3ck]

I'm okay with them asking to not be sniped, as long as mine stills supports the team

[suleiman71]

I'm okay with them asking to not be sniped, as long as mine stills supports the team

 

Which is always the case. 

[StrykerNC]

 

You can report them for battle rigging if they are talking in chat.

 

Is it really battle  rigging?  After all, they are the enemy.  They could be trying to bluff you while they are sending a full strike loadout down the border to find you. 

It's not like they are deciding anything behind anyone's back.  To me, battle rigging would be two members of a clan that MM on opposing teams and have a predetermined plan to influence the outcome.

[Crucis]

I'm okay with them asking to not be sniped, as long as mine stills supports the team

 

I'm not.  It's battle rigging, and it's extremely unethical IMO.

 

What I think should happen is if someone sends in a screen shot of carrier doing this, it should be an automatic 1 week ban for both carriers on the first offense, and scaling up from there for subsequent offenses.

 

 

[Mr_Alex]

 

I'm not.  It's battle rigging, and it's extremely unethical IMO.

 

What I think should happen is if someone sends in a screen shot of carrier doing this, it should be an automatic 1 week ban for both carriers on the first offense, and scaling up from there for subsequent offenses.

 

 

 

The old NavyField game where if incidents like this happen is counted as auto ABing (Arranged Battle) and resulted in perma bans 

[BaddParrot]

   Hit the Print screen button on the chat,  Send it to support.   Simple, Let support deal with it.

 If its not an issue for you, Don't.

 

   I will say this:   If its ok with you,  Then when do you draw the line?   If all the BB's on 1 team agree with all the BB's on another team to kill All the CA's or DD's first, is that ok?

                           Would all the DD's agreeing to not shoot each other & focus all the BB's ok?

 

     All I can say is lets not let the Pandora's box ruin our game.

[Jmthebigman]

well i could understand high tier cv's agreeing to not snipe at the beginning cause of the wait times etc.

Id say its a grey area. But yeah not attacking each other for the entire duration would be rigging the battle.

[1nv4d3rZ1m]

this is the second post today, the last post was four pages.

 

There have been two other threads on this topic since october: http://forum.worldofwarships.com/index.php?/topic/55754-gentlemens-agreements-midway-edition/ and I am to lazy to find the other link...

[Mr_Alex]

Bump