I am on a crusade to convince Avonmora that is of no value to guard inactives. There is virtually no benefit to doing so. It's going to cost you way more than it is worth to protect a player that more than likely isn't going to return and it's better to feed me (and other pirates) inactives rather than have us targeting active players. If said player means so much to you, you can help them rebuild if they ever return. So moving forward every time I find an inactive and take retaliation for it, I will message every known active pirate in the game and put it on the forums as well. The inactive purge is happening.

Your definition of inactive is not necessarily the same as the guild’s. Go on a vacation and don’t access the game for a week or 2 doesn’t mean you are inactive.

PhoenixKnight wrote:Your definition of inactive is not necessarily the same as the guild’s. Go on a vacation and don’t access the game for a week or 2 doesn’t mean you are inactive.

Minoan was inactive for a good month.

I took a spy report of Maloon Gray around a month ago when he first joined Conq. No fleets were moving.

Same as now

Please note: I am not a member of this movement, however I am just replying to your comment. I find a guild that puts up a fight, is better then those guilds that do not.

Admiral Nelson wrote:

PhoenixKnight wrote:Your definition of inactive is not necessarily the same as the guild’s. Go on a vacation and don’t access the game for a week or 2 doesn’t mean you are inactive.

Minoan was inactive for a good month.

I took a spy report of Maloon Gray around a month ago when he first joined Conq. No fleets were moving.

Same as now

Please note: I am not a member of this movement, however I am just replying to your comment. I find a guild that puts up a fight, is better then those guilds that do not.

The same could be said for the Guild definition of "inactivity". What if a player says "guys I have to undergo something important, do guard my fleets please".
It doesn't matter if this happens for a wedding, a mission for the CIA, a reportage for the BBC or to be in a band on tour. Your friends will help you.
I guess this is a hard thing to believe

I am not talking about Minoan. He, I know has quit. I am talking about others on Banger list that are just > 7 days

After some checks, it look like Banger has gone inactive and declared he will go inactive several times. VUDU should release such an inactive player and have Avonmora plunder this inactive

Clockwork wrote:Due to recent events, Banger is now quitting the game.

Real Life always takes precedence to this game.

A guild's decision to continue to protect it's players, regardless of the circumstances is their choice.

HOWEVER,

If a player gives notice to the guild that they will be inactive due to RL and fails to protect their best ships, they deserve to get hit.

Let's get real there are people on rosters that have been gone for months and aren't coming back and have no business being rostered. Minoan and now Marloon Grey are both prime examples of this. I understand if people step away for a bit and I have tried to inquire if that is the case prior to pursuing an inactive. The fact of the matter is poor choices are being made in regards of who to defend and as Dez indicated, if they failed to protect valuable assets regardless of duration then they deserve to be hit.

Also, I have mentioned in the past, it would really help give us a barometer of activity in the game if all guild masters would purge inactives regularly.

Maybe guildmasters should publish regular updates of yheir members activity status so the poor benighted pirates can save a few spy networks too.

Sarcasm aside...

Come on guys.. do the work and suss out the inactives yourselves. It aint rocket science : there is a simple way to note activity and its open to all players to see. It just means keeping track of likely targets thru publcally available metrics.

I did flesh out an inactive, Marloon Grey. Then one Stan Rogers decided to clear him and cast on me like crazy to protect him, it was laughable really. I could very well go back to targeting actives then everyone would be crying about that and saying, "Oh the poor traders and noobs!" I've tried to stay away from actives in favor of retired players but if my hand is forced then I'll just start poubeing on dumb noobs with big ships and low purses.

Its not down to pirates or privateers to dictate how or why guildmates may choose to defend their guild members. Stan doesnt have to explain himself to others on that. He may have many valid reasons for his actions. It might just be Tuesday.
Its always been the case that sometimes a guild lets an inactive member get wiped and sometimes they fight like crazy to guard them. Not the attackers place to question that really any more than a third party tossing a gennie in the works to stop someone wiping another player is questionable conduct. Messing with an enemies head is always permissable.