Hans_von_Sack

Game Admin
  • Content count

    624
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

199 Excellent

1 Follower

About Hans_von_Sack

  • Rank
    High Lord
  1. You can't join/train Glunmar as sergeant because the training post is too close to healer on the right and MAA on the left. Maybe I am just too plebish but I couldn't make it today. Personal note: As Bredby has no training, nobody can peace the starting war so technically the first capture after restart is always in an illegal war. Just sayin'
  2. No, it is not. It is ridiculous that many players like to think they know the rules and how to handle complaints best. Just a overall statement here, not personally adressed to you.
  3. Rowan claimed (for my understanding of the english language) that he wasn't part of the group that halted. But as we all know the "skirmish rule": If a skirmish breaks out and you walk into it as a member of one of the two fighting factions you are KOS to everyone from the other faction. And we do know that a skirmish doesn't end if there are still people alive which fought in it. I neither say Rowan is dumb nor he is banmongering with his report. I say he was at the wrong place in the wrong time which got him killed. There have been loads of similar situations in the past. Anyway I guess I made my point and will just wait for HAs decision.
  4. Hello, Hm, I think you got me wrong in some points. Basically you did not quote one of the evidence I myself brought to show that you can't acctually have been somewhere else. Sorry that I did not come to TS. Like I told you via Steam chat: I am pretty ill and since this afternoon occasionally my head feels like a dwarf inside is testing his new jackhammer. Now to the point: I never wanted to say that you have to show me any evidence or else the kill is legal. I searched a shitton of logs and from what I saw I thought it is enough evidence to acctually show that you were around. Don't want to requote everything but my point is that from how I understand the logs: J3yne, Preston, Sandor, Chinkilla and Otto (part of the halting party) were close to each other. As Preston and J3yne killed Srensen shortly after he killed you they coldn't have been somewhere else which means nothing but: you couldn't have been somewhere else. From what I understood from the posts and the logs the halting was at the gate and you followed Srensen up the stairs onto the walls. That's not somewhere else for me that's clearly a legitimate skirmish zone. It's neither that I dislike like you nor do I have any special feelings for Srensen trying to protect him. The one and only reason is that I've seen such cases quite often in my time as an admin on phoenix. For example: Lannisters raid a castle, fighting breaks out in the courtyard, Lannisters clear out the complete castle (including unarmed serfs/smiths) claiming a skirmish zone. Those cases were mostly deemed legal kills. As Srensen was killed by the raiders shortly after he killed you I say you were close to each other. Thanks for your understanding and sorry for trouble/anger I caused.
  5. Hello, Sorry for not answering, got a lot of stuff to do in RL and because of that I got not much nerves to do admin stuff in the meantime. Wasn't professional but I'll answer here now. The point is you made 3 reports on North for being killed three times within 30 minutes. Logs showed me that Boltons and North were skirmishing before that time, through that time and after that time. Going through all these logs took me more then one and a half hour and within that I saw many Boltons complaining via global about rule breaks by North which acctually were no rulebreaks. Don't want to accuse you of banmongering but as I think it's proven the skirmish never ended, the skirmish happened around your castle and you wrote "Was walking outside around my castle he rdmed me" I think it's just a legit kill. Again sorry for not answering. That's all I got to say.
  6. Totally that. If you get reported, you call me via steam, I go through the logs and check all evidence and then mark it invalid. Why should you get money and not me who acctually did work? Acctually everything has been said. I have banned people for banmongering before and I will do it again when I feel it's helping the community. Punishing people only because they thought there was a rulebreak will increase hate against the people who hand out these punishments (which is us) plus the salt within the community. PS: My way to lessen the amount of complaints has been since years: every single player should see that this is just a freaking game and decrease his amount of senseless hate to almost 0. But I know that this won't ever happen. So we all have to deal with the situation as it is.
  7. Give me half an hour online and I'll get 5 to 10 such situations and will get reported 5 to 10 times. Just some random picture from my archive: Someone could now just ride through those two people and then slaughter Alucard? I don't think so. Would be illegal help/interfering. Imagine a skirmish between 20 people? One riding through the skirmish zone would give you at least 6 KOS. So you could just join in the skirmish then killing everyone? Nope. Would be mass RDM.
  8. The first complaint refers to me and not to Ted as an admin. The second is solved 100% right: If you are moving and someone halts you, he has to give you 5 seconds to acctual read that you are halted and to halt. If you are standing, someone halts you and you start running then you clearly try to get away meaning he can kill you.
  9. Why should there be pikes or awlpikes in the nordic castle? Anyway there's no commoner pole in merc camp which is pretty annoying (or I am just too dumb to find it, in that case ignore me)
  10. Sorry mate, but this is a prime example for "interfering in war". And there is a good reason for that rule. As it is an organized strike against the defending forces of a castle activly under siege it's banworthy. 2 days aren't harsh at all.
  11. Uhm well I don't see any reason for removing bans if they were valid. If you feel a ban was not valid it's up to you to make an admin complaint and if it's proven that the ban was invalid: it gets removed from your history. Let me tell you about my admin-policy: If someone breaks the rules unintended, relizes that after a talk with an admin, excuses and offers a refund I don't see a reason to ban him. If someone broke the rules intentionally... If I tell someone he broke the rules and he just refuses... That is were I hand out bans. Shit happens, everybody does mistakes and nobody is perfect. That has nothing to do with your history. But if you random someone, an admin tells you you randomded and you try to sneak out by saying "grey zone" or "that and that was different" while your history tells us that you randomded a few times before it tells me that you just don't give a shit. And that's when you are removed. So the history is pretty helpful for me dealing with you. Without addressing to any specific person: People who want it to be cleansed frequently tell me nothing but them being notorious rulebreakers who don't wanna be perm banned.
  12. As he is a simple canadian I guess it's NA. I'll move it
  13. Tismirr for life mate... Anyway /vouch
  14. As I have been Admin at Oasis that time I can confirm the story. Don't wanna talk bad about my former admin-collegues but in fact Pepsi did absolutly nothing at all in the first place. Taking his admin permissions because of a friend of him getting banned (or him negating the decision) was not right. Don't want to disguise Pepsis rage afterwards but I can confirm that he is sorry about that as he excused to the staff and to me personally afterwards. I think the whole thing was a chain of misscommunication and just unlucky. Shouldn't be a reason to misjudge Pepsis sense for professional admin work.
  15. /vouch Being a long time friend of that lad I know that there has been trouble with a few people. But I really just know that he can be 100% professional and will do a great job out there. Go Pepps, go! Hopp Schwiiz!