I think, if I'm reading this correct, that T0yman is eluding to the point that sharing of assets (information included) is MC.
I've kinda kept the two seperate for this discussion, but I'd have to agree that two teams sharing information through a game, even if they are never seen in the same sector together in a game, are a MC. It's still "two teams working together". Harder to prove yes, but I'd have to agree in principle. I think when you see two teams mowing through each others grids, and not attacking each other, but if a third team moves they get attacked, there's been information shared, and on that note a MC is formed.

That's what I am saying.

Now forgive me T0yman for putting you on the spot. But I'm interested in your opinion here. If two teams choose to "MC" and work on another enemy should that be blocked in the games? Should it be said that any form of two teams working together is bad ethics? Lets' just say that GZ had already attacked Kraaken. Kraaken was weaker, but not out, but GZ was severly weakened. They come to you and ask for help in finishing the attack on Kraaken. You don't have the assets to attack either by yourself. Is it bad ethics to join them, or good game tactics?

I'm not a sysop, and I'm only a low-intermediate ability player, so maybe I'm missing something. In that case I'm sure someone will point it out...

You can't enforce any rule against information sharing, so don't even try; just accept it as part of the game. If two corps gang up on you, you're a victim of galactic politics; you lost the diplomatic game. Next time, make some friends.

Even if megacorping is legal, only one of those corps can win... and if they're megacorping in the first place, they are not too concerned about ethics so can easily backstab each other, making megacorping a questionable strategy in the first place. Also, a corp that wins by megacorping and/or backstabbing will have a bad reputation among the other corps, which would hopefully discourage the practice even further. There will continue to be a lot of accusations of megacorping, whether or not they are justified, but at least the players can argue amongst themselves, and the sysop doesn't have to pull out their hair trying to control an uncontrollable situation.

Rules against asset sharing are easier to enforce than rules against information sharing, but I think under some circumstances it's still very hard to prove. Maybe that kind of thing should also be legalized... for example, isn't it risk to drop a billiion creds in a citadel for transfer to another corp? Even if you can do it without risking losing the assets to an unintended recipient, what if the other corp backstabs you as soon as they have your assets?

Politics and diplomacy are a part of war. Don't ask the sysop to try and keep them out, it's impossible.

I had a rule in one of my games, if a corp is attacking an alien planet NO ONE is permitted to enter that area for minimum of 1 hour a day to allow the group to finish what they started. That being said you could not attack at the top of each hour to form a rule blockade, you had one shot to make sure so be ready and run in guns blazing. So is there a rule needed that in a tournament if 1 team starts to attack another no one can move in for a time period, dunno but it sure would have stopped what took place in the last game I just ended. I would not help either one, it is a tournament. Battle Of The Elite, not as someone stated Battle Of The Mega Corps, if you attacked a corp and crippled yourself to be that weak then I hope you have better planning next year. In a tournament setting IMO bad ethics. I can’t believe we are even using the word “ethics” when talking about Trade Wars.

That could be easily scripted to monitor in a tournament style game. Could be a little tougher in a building game but could still be done.

Obviously it's up to you - if you make such a rule you are changing the game in the way that you want, but you're also making extra work for yourself (your explanation of the rule and its side-effects gives me a headache). And is the game really any better with that rule in place?



I find it easier to think of it as reputation. A corp that wins by megacorping won't have as high a reputation in the community as a corp that can win on their own.

It is a NO ATTACK game I ran. It is no headache, if I am hosting the game and you agree to the rules when you join then I am obligated to provide the environment that the other players signed up for. If a player breaks the rule I just remove them completely and move on, they are free to start over as long as they follow the rules. I like rules it keeps honest people honest and exposes liars and cheats for what they are.
Being a Sysop can be a thankless job, but once I open the doors to the public it is my responsibility to provide and environment that meets their expectations.
If I found a group mega corping, I would just delete them and move on as I have better things to do with my time.

okay, okay



Sure, if it's just a casual game it's easy to do that, but if it's a tournament, then you have to worry about stuff that RP is probably worrying about:
- define mega corping (what do you do about information sharing?)
- prove they are mega corping, or deal with the fallout of deleting a corp you only thought was mega corping
- deal with all the claims of megacorping that are difficult to prove... spend all kinds of time policing the tournament without pay

No offence but thats the corps CEO decision on who to target and not to, its easy to say what "you "would have done it different, but I didnt see you bring a corp in to play!

I can't answer as I have no desire to host a tournament. I have more common sense than that... Sorry RP!!

lol okay I guess that's one solution

This is not court. You are not innocent until proven guilty. A decent sysop can see if its MC. You don't even have to be playing the game for that long to see whats happening. Its the sysops server and his/her decision to do what they need to do. IF the at question parties doesn't ever want to play there ever again so be it. If the sysop is running a server at free of charge and honest players stop coming. Then guess who just freed up their nights and weekends.

There are far more honest players in this game then there is dishonest. You cannot please the dishonest and ruine the game for the honest.

How? We haven't even properly defined MC. If one corp gives a sector number to another corp, is that MC? How does a sysop know that it's happened?

Amen!