Well, I just added a photo, hoping that he won't find the same, so that it will be easier for you guys to blacklist that troll who pretends to be me but types in American English... (The correct spelling is "favoUrite"...)

Sorry to see you weren't interested in my offer Death. Fear not though, I won't bother you on the matter again.

And I wouldn't worry too much about the doppelganger... it's quite clear which is which to anyone with half a brain and I am sure Fizzer will sort it out shortly.

Don't jump to conclusions as to who made the account. Although I agree that Vostro would be the Number One Suspect, it might be anyone stupid enough to think he can fool so active a community.
And although I also spell favourite with a **U**, it's not *the* correct way of spelling... American and British English, nowadays, are both mainstream.

Sorry for the problems you had Yeon. It is indeed unfortunately that sometimes we get boots for things outside of our control.

In this case, WarLight actually wasn't down. There was a major outage in the internet that affected lots of people. You can read about it here: http://www.silicon.com/technology/networks/2011/11/07/global-outage-takes-down-sites-and-services-across-the-internet-39748193/

It's possible that your opponent wasn't affected by the hiccup at all depending on his location in the world.

In the end, I don't know of a way to fix these kinds of issues, except to de-emphasize the "number of times booted" figure, and instead direct people to look at the percentage of times booted. Everyone that plays real-time games will eventually run into a few boots they couldn't help, but as long as your percentage is below 2-3 I'm pretty sure nobody will ever hold it against you.

I got booted once when I joined a real-time game then my power went out. I know it's not fun :)

Thanks for the reply, Mr. Domenico. For the first part, I agree I stated my point in a rough way. This thing happens with me sometimes. I want to say something, I state it in a hurry and end up saying something slightly different. But I guess I 'm not the only one with a life to care about over here, am I? For the second part, let's leave that uncommented. I don't care about being "fashionable" or "mainstream" or anything like that.

Thanks for the response, Fizzer!

Actually, I was at the same time connected to sites in US and Europe without problems, but apparently couldn't reach the Warlight site.

I wasn't booted the second I rearrived online, but about two seconds later. I know, because I decided to enter orders quickly (without thinking) and only got to click to start deploying before the boot. So my inclination is that he came back when I did.

If I knew this is how games are supposed to be played, perhaps instead of deploying, I should have gone for the boot menu myself... ;-)

CD, he can just save/upload the picture from your profile, like he did everything else..

Easiest way to secure yourself against such foolishness?

Become a member. Can't see anyone being so dedicated to their trolling to be willing to shell out the $30 for membership.

@ Perrin: Yup, you are right, I hadn't thought of that early enough. But in a thread I started ("ANNOUNCEMENT") I am mentioning things he can't copy, such as join date. What do you think about that?

@ Richard Sharpe: Sorry, but I 've made it clear that I am not going to become a member. I 'll keep this game free for me. What's more, the easy way isn't always so reliable. Since we aren't sure whether this guy is willing to pay $30 just to make me look bad, I think I have to avoid the risk of wasting my own money for a troll. To be perfectly honest, a thought I had in the day was that all this is happening in order to trick me out of my money. Well, I won't let this happen. I won't give anyone that satisfaction. If all this was done just to make me pay $30 for a game that I can have for free, it has failed. I am not a sucker and I don't like being treated like one. Goodnight.

(Note: I noticed that Fizzer has let this thing happen for at least 3 years, so maybe he does that on purpose... If I get banned for saying this, I won't play WL again. I won't bother to change the way I think, just for a game. But I won't let anyone make me look bad either. In any case though I am paying nothing for a game I can have for free. Is that clear, Mr. Fizzer, or do I need to come there and pull your ear?)

Let's clarify here... Fizzer has allowed for non-unique player names. That by no means he allowed such antics to occur in the past and nor does it mean he condones it. There is a considerable difference between those two things.

As for membership, I understand your position... I was merely pointing out the most obvious solution to the issue, that is all. I know in the past you spoke of desiring a 0% luck game so membership would not be without its benefits to you, however minimal they may be. Given your insistence on playing such a game I was surprised by your refusal of my offer.

@ Richard Sharpe: I see the difference you are pointing out, but if I were in Fizzer's position I would have thought about this thing. (Of course I 'd forget other things he thought of, as each person has different priorities.) I think that allowing usernames to be repeated is the biggest mistake someone can make in such sites. Now as for the 0% luck game I refused, I 've made it clear that I won't ever play any MP games, no matter the settings. What I 've been saying is that luck influence must be adjustable by non-members. A thing I 've read that has put me even more firmly against MP games is that other players can sneak into the settings and change them, so someone wanting to beat me would change the luck to 100%, as everyone knows that it always favours the player I am either attacking towards or defending against. It has happened many times to me, with the standard 75% luck percentage, to attack with 40 armies and not be able to kill 15, and then see 10 armies of my opponent's taking a territory where I had 100 armies placed. This is a major fault of the game and has to be corrected. And don't tell me about multiple attacks, I 've used them and seen them fail. I am very good at maths, I am not dumb, so I can see that there is a fault that always handicaps me. A reason I don't play MP games is that the AI doesn't boast after winning. I hate it when someone beats me by pure luck and then presents it as skill. And the worst thing is that the others believe him/her instead of me. Luck is not a skill. Luck is luck. I am good at maths because they don't depend on luck. In fact they can describe it, and that's the wise spot about maths. Being good at maths may not make you luckier, but it helps you explain how lucky someone has been somewhere. And this means a lot to me.

Honestly, shut up already. For the love of God you need to stop spamming this board with your juvenile drama trolling shtick. You don't want to play multi-player games? Fine. Nobody gives a rats backside. If you never play mp games then nobody will confuse you with someone else.

How many things can you possibly bitch about? How old are you? Hell, start up an alias with my name. I wouldn't care. I'd find it amusing. Because folks who know me would recognize the difference. You are without question one of the most annoying people this board has seen in some time.

yes.. he has tried robbing you out of your money.. for a game that he had created and ran for what? 7 years? the better portion of it *without any membership costs at all*.. and Creeping Death.. /not/ supporting Indie gamers, will just lead us to stagnating games.. at one point, I might add, many of us were *begging* to be allowed to donate to him for his work, and I am still agitated to be allowed to *only* spend 30$ to help fund the work of a great Indie game.

and Creeping Death.. if the 100% luck is always in the opponents favor.. wouldn't that even out? since the opponent is always someone else...? Fizzer believes in *not* forcing gameplay onto his players.. allowing each individual game to be modified to the players specifications allows for the greatest possible entertainment.. as people are able to play as they want to play, and not under some pre-determined style. Most cheaters prefer to use something a bit more *real* then luck favoritism, like modifying bonuses, or making sneaky card changes

and if you are good at *maths* check up on statistics.. check into many games and see just how more often you are F'd up then your opponents.. it averages out.. you just /notice/ when it happens to you, *because* it happened to you.. in other words.. you're complaining for variances because they are variances..

if you don't want to hear someone boast after winning because of luck for luck's sake, then play 0 luck games, I will personally host any and all 0 luck games you want to play, with anyone you want to play, and post here any *boasting* that goes on, and describe to you /exactly/ why you lost/won, in a mathematical sense.

Dr. Awesome, when you said

"Honestly, shut up already."

I said a silent "Amen" in my heart. Cheers.

@ Dr. Awesome: I became annoying for something that was making me angry, but today it suddenly turned funny. I couldn't exactly expect that, so I am not willing to give you or anyone else any apologies. I 'll just laugh.

@ Perrin3088: The troll turned funny, but now you seem to be trying to make me angry again. Nevermind, I just stated a thought, not a final conclusion. There is a huge difference between these two. Am I supposed to apologise for my thoughts? And as for MP games, I trust nobody enough for that. Thanks, but I 'll stick to SP games, else I am getting out of here.

@ Mercenary: Don't hurry to jump to conclusions.

Death, you didn't even read my note, did you? I was offering to immediately resign, thus leaving you to merrily play against the AI's as if it were a single player game.

And why should luck be available for non-members? If every facet of the game were available to non-members, what reason would there be to become a member? Gotta always keep em wanting more.


As for the luck, Perrin nailed it. You only notice when the odds work against you while ignoring the countless times they work for you. As for luck always working for the player, I haven't the faintest idea what you are talking about... I have looked at the luck calculator and it seems to be negative more often than positive.

Sorry, Richard, I didn't get your note at all.

The note in question was the message attached to the multiplayer game. I was generously offering to compose a 0-luck game of your desired settings against the AI at which I would surrender upon territory selection so as not to impact the game play.

Yup, I get your idea, but why am I supposed to let you select a map for a game I will play against AI opposition only? Doesn't sound very normal to me, you know... Though don't take this behaviour of mine personally. I 'd do the same thing with anyone else doing that. Of course there is much more I want to be able to set on my own, so there is much room for error, which I just can't accept. Fizzer made a terrible mistake when he decided that non-members will only create games with 75% luck. I know he can change it, at least put the default value to 0%, but more preferably let non-members choose the percentage as well as members can. I don't mind about the other member-exclusive settings, I only want Fizzer to unlock luck. If this had been done right, I 'd never feel any need to post anything on this forum. And looks like that would be good, as not many people seem happy with my personality. Most people seem to hate strict people and I am not the kind of person to pretend to have a different personality than the one I really have. Other people can do it and bravo to them, but I neither can nor want to do it. I see it as a very cheap way to achieve things, which "accidentally" is most often used in expense of someone else, rather than in favour of the total. Am I not clear enough yet?

Death,
I specifically said it would be a game of your choosing... map, cards, AIs, bonuses, %'s... everything. Would have been the same as if you created the game yourself single player with the exception of having 0-luck.

So in other words, you think a key feature that would spur people to buy membership should be free simply because you say it should? Makes perfect sense. Do you not understand how capitalism and society in general works? Obviously there is value in being able to modify the luck and as such, Fizzer has every right to treat it as such. This is his intellectual property afterall.