E4 Factions event


lets do it @Malicewolf your going down


how do we come up with 99999 e


Bring ittttttttt!!! :imp:


But Itachi is a good guy…


this is how you should be playing the game… not weakling backstabs… :stuck_out_tongue:



Okay, I managed to construct the story by hearing from a bunch of people on both ends of the balance.

I was selected to lead a faction during that event but, sadly, I was unable to access BD. That said, as leaders, we were given a very specific set of rules by @Malicewolf and @Alexander.

There were two incredibly emphasized and stressed on rules that were repeated several times to us: First is, do not kick ANYONE unless it’s incredibly crucial and necessary and even then, we should discuss the matter with Josh and Alex beforehand. Second is, we must accept the fact that we will have to play against our friends and that was the whole purpose of the randomization of player entires into factions.

From what I see, what happened this E4 clearly breaches these crucial rules. I’m a little curious and suprised as to why @Psi is being portrayed as innocent…

Now I don’t know about you guys but if I remember anything from my law elective class, it’s that when someone breaks the rules, they get punished by the authority who placed the rule in the first place.

That’s just my 2 cents on the issue.


I am watching all over you , Karma will strike !!


my own team kicked me then I destroyed them :smiley:


You are a big liar :slight_smile:


atleast im not a big cryer


Welp. That was mildly entertaining. LAN got lucky they didn’t have to fight us, but I guess that’s what they wanted anyways right?


they are crying in chats cus I stabbed them for being rude :slight_smile: and playing dirty by using spies in other alliances and people to control the alliance to prevent wars with them


lol. thats funny coming from the player that was sending PLO screenshots of our chat, chat logs, and spy and army locations.


@Alexander I have been waiting for your justification on this from past 2-3 days. Since you didnt make any appearance I had to tag you.


Since Hitmo asked us not to make your (@Alexander) answer public I’ll respect that decision, but I still feel like a proper response to the following hasn’t yet been given.

@Alexander According to you the rule regarding not kicking anyone was never listed explicitly or made formal, it was simply asked of the leaders to not kick anyone unless they were somehow sabotaging the team. Also according to you, going against the leader’s wishes can be construed as sabotaging the team.

First of all, I think it should indeed not need to be made explicit that kicking your most influential player, then leaving your own alliance, then the co-leader kicking the rest of the active members is unwanted behaviour. You’d think people can figure that one out for themselves.

However, I’d say if anyone was sabotaging the team it was the leader and co-leader of our alliance. Kicking all those players and alienating the ones that were active that you didn’t kick, leaving your team, all that did far more damage to the team than I could do. Even if you construe it as me going against the leader’s wishes (which is ridiculous, given that practically no one in our alliance would argue he was even leading at that point), the “correct” course of action would have been to kick me before war started, and then to have sent a mass to the team that what I did was incorrect. Not kicking me as war is starting and leaving your own alliance in the hands of Leo who was obviously even more incompetent and irrational.

I don’t see how you can possibly justify two players ruining an event for so many players. Being a leader and/or co-leader on this event should, if anything, mean you are held to higher standards. I’m assuming the reason you (Alexander) and Josh didn’t make the rules “official” is that you believed those that were picked as leaders wouldn’t be low enough to actually go against these “requests” anyway, and in all honesty it should be obvious when the organiser of the event and the head of the game “request” that you abide by certain “informal” rules and that they “expect” you to honor these restrictions, I’d say it should be obvious that you don’t go against these wishes.

Now, I’m assuming this post will get deleted again or this topic will get locked now because it’s not what you (@Alexander) like to see posted, and you don’t think Psi/Leo deserve to get criticism for this. However, they DO deserve the criticism for the above listed reasons, for the fact that they ruined an era that was supposed to bring players back to the game and that was supposed to show the best of BD (help the newbies, help the intermediates, have people get to know each other) rather than show that personal pride and ego gets put before an entire alliance’s sake.

Obviously, since apparently these rules were never made official (which I really believe is an extremely weak excuse, for the longest time we didn’t have official rules on BD either way since everyone knew multi-ing and farming would get you banned, and it was up to admins to decide on the actual punishment) you’re not going to ban either Psi or Leo. I think this is ridiculous, because I really do think what they have done has hurt not only the era, but has hurt more players and has hurt the game more than the majority of farming cases that people DO get banned for. But since this apparently isn’t in the cards, it would at least be nice to see @Alexander say that this was stupid and that this is indefensible behavior, rather than having you defend actions that have been incredibly hurtful to many players and to the game. I also honestly believe that if someone of a lesser “stature”, since apparently Psi was being considered for admin at one point, had done this, you wouldn’t have been defending them as much. That makes me sad, since I think everyone should be judged equally on Battledawn by admins, regardless of how influential they are in the community or how much they’ve boosted. But apparently Battledawn resembles the real world a bit more than I’d like to see in that not all are treated equally.


They weren’t “rules” so much as basic requests, which changed during the era on demand (as there were more spies than expected).

Making them rules would have created very different problems (simply by taking away flexibility).

The issue we see (that I think is actually relevant) is that it was too easy to kick. It should have probably taken a bit of effort – Didn’t expect it to be needed. We expected the era would be so non-serious no one would need to be kicked, because they’d all be spied and not really care, as it was meant for newbs anyway.

– Turns out, it became quite the opposite for everyone, you included.

Criticism is fine, we have plenty ourselves. But there’s limits to what is and isn’t acceptable – in the end we have to protect the smaller parties in the community, the mass will generally protect itself by sheer numbers.

– In the end Felipe treated a newb-training era as a serious one (a lot of people did that) and stuck to a principle that would have been best (in my opinion) to drop in this era. Simply because it added weight, drama to an era that should have been relatively carefree.

This is a shame, and I wish it had been different, but there’s a place, time and tone for criticism like that. This simply went too far.

It’s not about what does or does not hurt the game, the very liberty admins took there did more damage to the game than letting it slip in my opinion.

You sign up for a certain ruleset, with a certain understanding. if you can not rely on admins to stick by what they claim, say, whatever, you can not play safely. We need to get rid of the ambiguity there and get rid of liberal interpretation – If it’s a rule it’s a rule. If it’s not it’s legal.

If you can’t read anywhere that you’re not allowed to do something, you shouldn’t be punished in any way for doing so. That we’ve strayed from this is a major error and something we intend to correct – not to expand on.

In the future we will get rid of all the grey area rules currently in the game, replacing them by clear black-white ones where possible.

It’s a nice and dramatic statement by all means and makes a beautiful point for an election and all that (being a filthy libertarian, I can’t help but agree), but in the end it doesn’t matter if it’s him, you, or a new player.

In actuality had it been a new player we would have banned a long time ago over this, as a new player simply can not expect such a thing to happen and should not be held accountable whatsoever.

While it’s no news we try to forge stronger connections with players who are more crucial to the game (in the end a newb who quits next era is less important to figure out than a leader who is crucial to a family’s existence), that doesn’t (and has never) translated to management beyond CRM. Simply put this thread went further than any I remember in the existence of BD, that it happens to be an influential leader who mucked up is a shame (as yes, that will hurt even more in the long run) and also ties our hands a bit more (in the end, while he made a choice and has his own perspective and reasons for coming to that, he unlike many others should have been able to predict this would happen.).

Regardless we discussed this in detail at the time it happened (and it’s far too late to bring up more arguments now), additionally PSI has been discussed aplenty by friends and foes public and private alike, it’s been a week since the era ended and I think the time to move on has come a long time ago already.

As stated over and over again, it sucks it happened, it’s a shame the choices that were made were made, and I wish I had foreseen and countered it prior to inception (as was, of course, up to me). Going to put a timer on this thread so we don’t end up discussing this for the history of time, feel free to ask privately about this or make a new thread about anything new/specific.

We have to think about our new players here, and a long and bitter discussion like this does not give off a friendly “welcome to the community”, sadly I can not prevent it from being recommended to every newb anyway. All we can do is move ahead, and I hope in the future you (and many new players) can fight Felipe (and many new players) and settle your differences that way. That’s Battle Dawn, right?

Edit: While liking is very nice, it actually helps things get recommended more… I’d appreciate if people could not like old posts in this thread (or this), I don’t want to remove this as a lot of valid emotions and frustrations were shared, but to have the most toxic thread in the history of BD on every newb’s first to read… Let’s not :stuck_out_tongue:


@Alexander do you realize how many people have you disrespected & hurt their feelings by saying that it was a non serious casual era?

I mean really there were players in all 4 teams who have pulled All nighters (thanks to 3 tick speed), players including me have invested 12+ hours in this era,juggled with exams & attacking,players like PLO, ICEMAN, Babykong have used tons of reds to your so called ‘‘non serious’’ era. Josh did say that he aimed to teach newbs this era, but that doesn’t mean the era becomes joke for others.
It really makes me sad to hear this from a person of your stature & position.

I heard some one saying that to be a Community Manager one needs to understand the emotions of other players & connect with them.


As mentioned, it was meant as (and advertised as) a non serious casual era.

That’s not how it panned out, sorry if I confused you there.


Hitmo, he’s not saying it wasn’t a serious era. He’s saying it was never intended to BE a serious era. That I can definitely confirm. We didn’t expect the pro’s to pick up on this even a quarter as much as they did. We honestly thought most vets would view this as more of a waste of time as the idea was there wouldn’t be any obvious winner (once again, my naive thoughts to think people wouldn’t try to ally one another).

The era was supposed to be 1000 ticks of chaos where attacks were flying in every direction. We had assumed the vet’s would play more casually rather than going full throttle into an event where we clearly stated, we expect there to be NO real winner.

This is really just a case of misunderstanding hitmo. Alex is not trying to say you guys didn’t play seriously. Just that the event was never intended for a serious mindset. This is something I myself said before the event started.


What a joke this is, disrespected because he said it should have been not serious? who cares if people’s feelings are hurt, that’s what happens every single tick.