Untouchable Super-Users

English Boards General
21

P.S. I used bold letters, as some people have poor eyesight probably.

Is it just me to see a similiarity in behaviour to some other users that have similiar names? 

22

All other inner-city connections that highscore posted are hard-coded bans which you can't even schedule without AS giving you an error. For Beijing, this is not the case at the moment. So it's illegal by the rules, but possible by the game. The intention of a mail to the support would be to introduce those hard-coding for Beijing (and other cities where this might have been forgotten) as well.

There are no hard-coded bans right now, that's why it's part of the game rules. We're thinking about implementing this, so you wouldn't be able to schedule any of those unwanted flights in the first place - but as a first step we'll need to extend the current list as it's lacking some airport pairs.

23

Is it just me to see a similiarity in behaviour to some other users that have similiar names? 

Yes indeed. Might be that I mixed these 2 users up, then sorry, Ula.

24

This is exactly, what I expected - as it is perfect example, how Super-User are thinking. Because what you clearly wrote was:

"Even if they break the rules, it still no bother me".

In other words; you confessed, that keeping of Game rules means nothing to you.

Hi,

your logic is just as correct as "I fit in my suit, my suit fits in my suitcase, so I fit in my suitcase."

If I remember correctly, the rule against flying between two airports in the same city was introduced against slot blocking. Some players used a few planes to block a lot of slots with very short flights. My colleague/competitor operates over a thousand planes. He operates half a dozen flights between NAY and PEK. The guy probably does not even know that it is against the rules. Anyway, half a dozen flights don't harm anybody, and they don't bother me. If you conclude that game rules mean nothing to me, so be it.

* sigh *

Have a nice day,

Jan

25

Anyway, half a dozen flights don't harm anybody, and they don't bother me. If you conclude that game rules mean nothing to me, so be it.

Yes, you are right. If you tolerate one single flight, which is not according to Game rules and do not report it, it makes from you untrustworthy person for me.

Rules are rules, and the fact, that you are here for years, makes this case even worse and sad.

Edited:

And you helped us this way to make a decision, see below ↓↓↓↓↓

26

Final statement:

Me and my friends would like to say thank you - to a few of you, who supported us, but we cannot continue here anymore. So we closed our accounts.

Although I started this topic and begged like moron for solving my Ticket and my friend's email this way, it did not help. We don't care, who are the people responsible for support, answers and solving problems regarding Game rules. But we know, that the people don't do their job well. So we don't have any reason to pay them.

And final thought for owners of this site: PEK-NAY case concerns one user with 4 credits per day. Because you refused to solve this problem, you have lost 20 credits per day for ever right now - and others will follow I guess. 

27

Ula: That's extremely sad. I'm aware that, not all in the support is currently good. There is a new election of the UAB and this should be a chance to improve. I hope, that the game will not loose anymore players i the future this way.

28

I can understand Ula's feeling. I have read many topics asking for fairness, but without proper handle, turned out to be complain and disappoint. Also I remember once in a while, when some player called for a punishment for some other players against the rules, but afraid of losing those some other players, AS decided to not punish them. I agree with Ula, fairness is the base of this game, why would a person complaining the game not fair being treated like this. sigh~

29

I think Ulas reaction is overstated but yes - (un-)fairness is a big problem. The worst thing are player who claim their fairness and coopertiveness (and apply for UAB) but playing unfair and are punished for cheating and other unfair behaviour.

30

The list of citiy pairs which are forbidden to operate so far is this list (below). If you feel that other city pairs should be added to the ban-list then please submit to AS support - that’s what Spezialist is asking for. This is called the official way and yes, you will most likely not receive an answer but AS team can track your ticket. Asia Bangkok: BKK/DMK Dubai: DXB/DWC Osaka: KIX/ITM Seoul: ICN/GMP Shanghai: SHA/PVG Taipeh: TPE/TSA Tehran: THR/IKA Tokyo: NRT/HND Europe Berlin: THF/TXL/SXF (/BER) London: LCY/LGW/LHR/STN/LTN Milan: MXP/LIN Moscow: SVO/DME/VKO Oslo: OSL/TRF/RYG Paris: CDG/ORY/LBG Rome: FCO/CIA Stockholm: ARN/NYO/BMA North America Chicago: ORD/MDW Dallas: DFW/DAL Houston: IAH/HOU Montreal: YUL/YMX New York: JFK/EWR/LGA Toronto: YYZ/YTZ Washington: IAD/DCA/BWI South America Buenos Aires: AEP/EZE Rio de Janeiro: GIG/SDU Sao Paulo: GRU/CGH

I would like to offer JFK/LGA/EWR-ISP/HPN/SWF. Especially JFK-ISP. I know I have commented on that multiple times, but not only that the players love using l4t to fly that route, c’mon.

31

I think Ulas reaction is overstated but yes - (un-)fairness is a big problem. The worst thing are player who claim their fairness and coopertiveness (and apply for UAB) but playing unfair and are punished for cheating and other unfair behaviour.

? Who is cheating and applying for UAB?

32

Only a few punishments are public. Perhaps that's the problem. At least something we have to discuss about.

But the forum is big enough to form an opinion on some of the candidates. I will not influence the election and will not disclose a name. I presume you will read it in the internal UAB forum.

I said too much but I'm really frustated for now.

33

@Derpendja: There are of course always different opinions possible. I assume the player that you are referring to and completely disagree with what you state. That person is being looked at, but is he already officially accused or has it even been established that those cases were really wrongdoings? Not to my knowledge at all.

To emphasize your moral superiority you express your concern that you don’t want to influence the election yet you make it more or less easy to guess who that could be. What a lame move that is… If you really didn’t wanted to influence anything you would have been just quiet and keep your mouth shut.

(PS: That’s my personal opinion)

34

Wow, offending.

That give's one case a new aspect in which you are defending stock manipulating because the case is about your personal buddy.

35

Hi Derpendja,

I don't know which player you refer to.

But in political terms, what you are doing is called anti-politics. You throw mud and cause suspicion, but you keep your virginity because you haven't accused anybody.

Either you stick out your neck, and feel the consequences (well, not more than public shame and embarrassment) if your accusations are too light. Or you don't mention it at all.

Just my two cents.

Jan

36

Hi Jan,

I went into rapture and I am sorry about that. Your answer shows that it is not possible to imply on single players and that's what I wanted. But to make one thing clear - it's no accusing about current cases. There was a cheating case two years ago.

I am playing AS for eight years now and I am member of the UAB for four year. But I was never been so much frustrated before.

Andy

37

Hi Andy,

thanks for your kind reply.

Players will always break rules, or the spirit behind the rules. Sometimes on purpose, like those who operate dozens of small planes on new servers. Sometimes they break rules by ignorence, like my colleague/competitor who has a few flights between PEK and NAY.

Ula was frustrated because he was the victim of players who claimed many slots very rapidly. I would also be frustrated. But mind you, according to the current rules these greedy guys don't break any rules if they operate "real" flights that carry passengers from A to B. That is why many players - including myself - ask for better and clear rules.

Ula also said there were super-users who are allowed more than other users. He even claimed I was one of them. I don't believe there are super-users and I know for sure that I have no ties with Martin or anyone in the AS-team. However, I do believe that Martin has been too relaxed about the problem. Allowing the same strategy over and over again frustrates other players and leads to the perception that some players can get away with murder.

As for the "cheating" candidate... In the past, the UAB published the usernames of players and their airlines who were penalized for breaking the rules. If the UAB decided two years ago that this player broke the rules, you should not feel guilty for reminding us about the case. If the UAB decided this player did not break the rules, you should accept it and remain silent.

I guess the player in question doesn't feel very guilty about the whole thing if he is now a candidate for the UAB.

Have a nice day,

Jan

Edit:

Andy, I have posted a question on the UAB forum.

The candidate in question is the one person who can talk freely about the case.

38

I am a little bit surpised.

But mind you, according to the current rules these greedy guys don’t break any rules if they operate “real” flights that carry passengers from A to B. 

From which statement of mine do you deduce this?

As I said before a lot of decissions are not public and the name was not offical announced - that's the job of AS to do this and it is not done every time in order to avoid a witch-hunt. That's definitively wrong in my opinion and would prevent some discussions now about some candidates and the neutrality of UAB members and AS-Team staff - including me. If AS is not willing to call punished cheaters by name I will not, too.

Btw. I am with you that there are no "Super-Users" and everybody is treated in the same way. But the reaction speed of AS is causing exactly this impression. 

39

Hi Andy,

you did not say slot blocking is within the rules. According to the rules you are only slot blocking if you operate flights  "with dummy aircraft not equipped with crew or seats, or timetabled in such a way as to ensure cancellations will occur".

The rules say you are blocking slots if you "make use of slots for no other reason than to deny their use to another player". The intention to block slots is illegal. If I operate a 747 out of Timbuktu and I say that I do it on purpose, so nobody else can use that slot, I am cheating. If I operate 100 L4T's out of JFK and I say it is not my intention to deny other players to use the slots, I am not cheating. Until someone in the AS-team or the UAB can read my mind, nobody can say what my intentions are. That is why the rule is ineffective.

I learn something new every day. So some decisions against cheaters are published, and others are not ? Strange policy.

You are correct if you don't want to name punished cheaters if AS doesn't name them either. But you cannot say that everybody is treated in the same way if some names are published and others aren't  ;-)

Anyway, I did not want to ask you who it was in my previous post. But I thought the player in question could clear up the situation, so I have added a question on the UAB forum.

Have a nice day,

Jan

40

I think for transparency, all support decisions should be publicly available.