Warriors challenging 1st turn after inactive?

Expert Poster Joined: Oct 23, 2006 Posts: 72

According to the rulebook "No warrior may challenge...on the first turn after being inactive," yet this is happening. Isn't there supposed to be some software in place that prevents this?

What is happening is there's a scum warrior that sits inactive until a low-FE warrior gets above him, then he challenges him and, for some reason, it goes through. Usually he wins.

I wonder if there's some bug/quirk in the challenge program that overlooks the fact that he was inactive because other warriors on his team have been active, because that's also true in this case.

The first time it happened, I emailed RSI and it just happened to be when their site crashed a couple months back so the email was rejected and I forgot about it. Now it's happened again.

At any rate, I'd like to see this fixed because it's unfair and starting to get annoying.

Expert Poster Joined: Jul 30, 2003 Posts: 85

This is a good catch by you. I'd report it to RSI (along with the turns that the warrior challenged and who he fought). I wonder if it matters if the rest of the team is actively fighting though?

Posted: Mon Jun 04, 2007 5:40 pm

If you are listed in the NL you can challenge. It's always been this way. If he's sitting there and you know he's doing it, why don't you avoid(and d/c with an aimer, or arrange for it to happen).

ArchMaster Poster Joined: Sep 05, 2005 Posts: 1316

I'm not sure where you found that statement, but the real rule is as long as the warrior is listed in the NL the previous turn. You can sit a couple of turns and break out challenges as long as your warriors are listed.

Don't worry about contacting RSI. There is nothing they will do.

Expert Poster Joined: Oct 23, 2006 Posts: 72

JGW wrote:

I'm not sure where you found that statement, but the real rule is as long as the warrior is listed in the NL the previous turn. You can sit a couple of turns and break out challenges as long as your warriors are listed. Don't worry about contacting RSI. There is nothing they will do.

It's the 2nd sentence in the "FILLING OUT YOUR STRATEGY SHEETS/THE CHALLENGE AND AVOID SECTION" of the rulebook.

Well, I still think that's unfair, since the rules don't explain what "inactive" means, though must imply inactive for three turns and dropping off the NL. They could at least specify this in the rulebook!

Now I feel like an arse because I just sent this guy a nasty-gram in the personals. Embarassed

Oh well, it's still sneaky & underhanded. If he'd stay active we could settle it like immature brats!

Posted: Mon Jun 04, 2007 7:04 pm

Ajax wrote:

JGW wrote:

I'm not sure where you found that statement, but the real rule is as long as the warrior is listed in the NL the previous turn. You can sit a couple of turns and break out challenges as long as your warriors are listed. Don't worry about contacting RSI. There is nothing they will do.

It's the 2nd sentence in the "FILLING OUT YOUR STRATEGY SHEETS/THE CHALLENGE AND AVOID SECTION" of the rulebook.

Well, I still think that's unfair, since the rules don't explain what "inactive" means, though must imply inactive for three turns and dropping off the NL. They could at least specify this in the rulebook!

Now I feel like an arse because I just sent this guy a nasty-gram in the personals. Embarassed

Oh well, it's still sneaky & underhanded. If he'd stay active we could settle it like immature brats!

Inactive is not listed in the newsletter, it says something there about going inactive after missin 2 consecutive turns.

Send an email to rsi and they may pull your ad. Or go with it and proceed to whip on the offending team--legal move or not, its still a cheezy cheapo kinda thing to do, sorta on the lines of taking a 4 turn vacation after a kill.

Posted: Tue Jun 05, 2007 8:26 am

I see this happen in Aruak all the time. It's routine. It's challenging to play Andorian style, always up challenging and getting young warriors too high ranked. This is just another tool to help win with (now I sound like a Larq).

ArchMaster Poster Joined: Jul 17, 2002 Posts: 1054

Ajax wrote:

It's the 2nd sentence in the "FILLING OUT YOUR STRATEGY SHEETS/THE CHALLENGE AND AVOID SECTION" of the rulebook.

That would be one of the many reasons that rulebook has earned the nickname "The Little Red Book of Lies".

Posted: Tue Jun 05, 2007 8:52 am

Ajax wrote:

JGW wrote:

I'm not sure where you found that statement, but the real rule is as long as the warrior is listed in the NL the previous turn. You can sit a couple of turns and break out challenges as long as your warriors are listed. Don't worry about contacting RSI. There is nothing they will do.

It's the 2nd sentence in the "FILLING OUT YOUR STRATEGY SHEETS/THE CHALLENGE AND AVOID SECTION" of the rulebook.

Well, I still think that's unfair, since the rules don't explain what "inactive" means, though must imply inactive for three turns and dropping off the NL. They could at least specify this in the rulebook!

Now I feel like an arse because I just sent this guy a nasty-gram in the personals. Embarassed

Oh well, it's still sneaky & underhanded. If he'd stay active we could settle it like immature brats!

I really had to laugh at the immature brat thing. It seemes like we all fall into that quite often.

That being said I have to ask how you can call anything sneaky and underhanded when you claim that anything goes in playing such as downchallenging. Don't take this wrong because I feel that everyone has the right to play the game however they enjoy it. I do think it is almost funny that you almost sounded like an Andorian or at least like Adie Wink

with the sneaky & underhanded. Wink

As to the rule, it has been years since I have seen the old rule book, but I know that as long as your team/warrior is listed on the NL you can request a challenge.

I think one of the sneakest tricks I had ever seen was one that Moriarity use on me and many others. He would screen those NL's posted for warriors getting their invites and challenging them as the arrived in 100

ArchMaster Poster Joined: Jul 17, 2002 Posts: 1054

Soultaker69 wrote:

He would screen those NL's posted for warriors getting their invites and challenging them as the arrived in 100

Challenge in AD? Now that is just crazy talk!

Posted: Tue Jun 05, 2007 9:43 am

Soultaker69 wrote:

I really had to laugh at the immature brat thing. It seemes like we all fall into that quite often.

That being said I have to ask how you can call anything sneaky and underhanded when you claim that anything goes in playing such as downchallenging. Don't take this wrong because I feel that everyone has the right to play the game however they enjoy it. I do think it is almost funny that you almost sounded like an Andorian or at least like Adie Wink

with the sneaky & underhanded. Wink

, what do you mean Wink

? Hey HEY HEY!! Who said I was sneaky and underhanded! Am not! <points finger> Wayne is!

Wink

?

Oh, right, that's what the wink was for. I never said it was bad or wrong though! Razz

Wayne is a GOOD Andorian... usually. Wink

Expert Poster Joined: Oct 23, 2006 Posts: 72

Soultaker69 wrote:

Ajax wrote:

JGW wrote:

I'm not sure where you found that statement, but the real rule is as long as the warrior is listed in the NL the previous turn. You can sit a couple of turns and break out challenges as long as your warriors are listed. Don't worry about contacting RSI. There is nothing they will do.

It's the 2nd sentence in the "FILLING OUT YOUR STRATEGY SHEETS/THE CHALLENGE AND AVOID SECTION" of the rulebook.

Well, I still think that's unfair, since the rules don't explain what "inactive" means, though must imply inactive for three turns and dropping off the NL. They could at least specify this in the rulebook!

Now I feel like an arse because I just sent this guy a nasty-gram in the personals. Embarassed

Oh well, it's still sneaky & underhanded. If he'd stay active we could settle it like immature brats!

I really had to laugh at the immature brat thing. It seemes like we all fall into that quite often.

That being said I have to ask how you can call anything sneaky and underhanded when you claim that anything goes in playing such as downchallenging. Don't take this wrong because I feel that everyone has the right to play the game however they enjoy it.

I don't take it wrong; however, it must be a misquote for I've never claimed that "anything goes...such as downchallenging." Believe me, if I thought that, I wouldn't be complaining! Laughing

Posted: Tue Jun 05, 2007 10:59 pm

pipthetroll wrote:

If you are listed in the NL you can challenge. It's always been this way. If he's sitting there and you know he's doing it, why don't you avoid(and d/c with an aimer, or arrange for it to happen).

Then there is the Scenario I experienced a few years ago when my Lunger sitting on the DM Throne in Nytyole Island Arena 33 was Killed on a Challenge by a Warrior NOT LISTED in the Newsletter!

Other Warriors were Listed in the Newsletter, but NOT that one!

I was in the Philippines on vacation and checked the newsletter and Emailed my Avoids. Had I Known about that Hidden Warrior I would have Avoided that Team because the other warriors were too low to challenge!

That was a Lunger I would have run in ADM and I Rarely run warriors in ADM Arenas!

I almost left the game over that because RSI would not resurrect my Dead Warrior!

So I Boycotted ADM, except for a while when I ran some Warriors in the Slow ADM, but another snafu caused me to drop ADM again!

Now I MIGHT run my New Graduated Aimer in ADM, but who knows?

Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 7:22 pm

HAMMER, you know old buddy you travel alot. i need your job.