I was just told landtrading = coordination
I am sure at some point that would be obvious if it got caught and reported to me.
I also think like someone said, it is not worth it on this server?

This thread has a lot of theorizing and proofs that it MAY be worth it for dicts, once going over 50k land. Anyway, it hasn't happened :) heh. and it won't now!

So is my country getting deleted?

So, I guess it is a matter of judgment whether something is considered landtrading or not.

Can someone please explain why I haven't been deleted?

I grabbed someone playing the same strategy as me, he retalled, and we both gained land. That would be considered landtrading, would it not? So why did the two of us not get deleted?

I would really like to not be playing Russian roulette where every time I grab a country that can retal me, I might get deleted.

Rockman, don't be silly. You know what they mean.

No, actually, I do not. I do not know what criteria will determine whether or not I get deleted for grabbing other countries.

Gogy requesting LT via msg = deleteable action.

So if Rockman messages KoH, it can cause deletion of both countries by your logic?

I don't think it's hard to figure out... if someone writes somewhere, "Let's land trade!" and then a land trade takes place and it was reported or a mod was aware of it, it would be a deletion.

If a big country hits someone and that country hits back, and *then the same two countries do it a second or third time*, and it's mutually beneficial land trading that the two countries are engaging in, that could be a deletion. Presumably the mods will err on the side of caution and nobody will get deleted just for grabbing and getting retaled or grabbing someone more than once! Probably not something to worry about!

In other words, I can get deleted if I don't go to war with someone who hits me twice, but if I coordinate landtrading with someone and we each hit each other only once, and we coordinate somewhere that the moderators can't see, then I'm fine?

If you choose to see the rule as ambiguous and scary then you can succeed in seeing it that way; if you choose to see it as it actually is, as a preventative ruling announced to deter people from engaging in coordinated land trades, and a ruling that will be enforced only in confirmed or obvious cases, then it becomes sensible and productive!

The problem is, this goes against game theory. If I hit a country a 2nd time in a set, and we both benefit from exchanging 1:1 retals with each other, then its unlikely that we'd benefit from warring each other - we'd both suffer from a war. Especially with permanent ghost acre DR, its basically impossible to benefit from warring someone. But because they've fluffed up the warring system in EE, now they're going to try to force you to war someone, even if its not beneficial, by the threat of being deleted if you don't war them. This is total bullfluff.

How about this: I find out what country you are, and I hit you once, and then after you retal, I hit you a 2nd time. Now, you can either start a war with me, and we both get screwed, or you can do 1:1 retals where we both benefit. I have the same choice to either start a war with you because you're doing 1:1 retals, and bring us both down, or I can accept the 1:1 retals that benefitted us both. So your hand has been forced here by the admins, that you must fight a war that will hurt your country, or just not retal at all.

Now how is that fair to you?

I find it hard to believe i would get deleted for retalling with a PS a second or third time.

land trading doesn't have to be coordinated to be effective. And as Rockman is illustrating it can be forced on someone unwillingly if they are making self interested decisions.

If they look at IRC logs or posts from alliance message boards or in-game messaging or some other preponderance of evidence before taking enforcement action, then you're still safe and things are just like always, with the only downside that some people might be able to get away with landtrading if they plan it privately off-site... except they already could do that before this rule, and it's not usually very effective to land trade in Primary anyway.

BTW, in your example you're worried about being forced into a war, but people can already force you into wars by hitting you repeatedly or stealing oodles of tech or something. But anyway, I never said they *would* delete you for doing multiple land exchanges, I said *could*, and like I said in the first paragraph, as long as they don't just delete willy nilly you'll be fine.

Oh goodie. Now you're going to ask the admins to read LaF's site to determine if there was any organization of landtrading in primary on there. I'm sure the information there would never be leaked to LaF's competitors while it was being scoured for proof of coordination.

No, I'm sure LaFers opposed to cheating can screencap the evidence and turn it in. LaF wouldn't turn a blind eye to cheating on their watch.

*sly smile*

I've got a big dict farmer, bewarned.

You could treat clan members like brothers or people playing from the same building. Safe list them, and prevent them from allying or grabbing each other?

now i dont think that's such a good idea. then they'd all have to tell each other who they are, their targets might be limited, they'd have to crosscheck every time they go to make a grab, etc :)

my dict is swollen

Vic plays with Mr. Clears dict almost every day.

Someone should let the mods know, two people can't be using one dict.

Well, what do they do when they have like 5 people playing from the same building who may not all know each other? Don't they just have them on the safe list so the mods know to keep a closer eye on them?

Whole of LaF lives in the same building.