This article addresses ongoing concerns about moderation, enforcement, and communication within the game. The goal is to highlight systemic issues that are affecting player trust and long term retention.
At present, the reporting system feels like a black box. Players submit reports and receive no feedback at all. There is no indication whether a report was reviewed, dismissed, ignored, or is still waiting in a queue.
This lack of transparency discourages players from engaging with the system. If reporting feels pointless, people will stop doing it.
Other games have shown better approaches. Old School RuneScape is a strong example, where developers communicate outcomes and occasionally display action taken against cheaters very publicly. These public actions reinforce that rules are enforced and that reporting has value.
Even minimal feedback would be a major improvement. A simple status such as reviewed and action taken, reviewed and no violation found, or pending review would go a long way toward restoring confidence.
Current punishments are too lenient, especially for repeat offenders and long term cheaters.
New players making small mistakes such as running one or two extra accounts can reasonably receive lighter penalties as a warning. That is understandable.
However, veteran players who repeatedly cheat over long periods should not be treated the same way. Cases like Yliria and others highlight a pattern where sustained botting and repeated violations result in little consequence.
This raises a serious question. If player retention is the reason for lenient punishments, what kind of players are being retained?
Allowing repeat offenders to continue sends a message that cheating is tolerated. That undermines fair competition and drives away legitimate players.
If retention is truly a priority, the current handling of new players does not reflect that.
New players asking basic questions on Discord are often ignored or, in some cases, mocked by admins. First impressions matter. A new player who joins, asks for help, and is dismissed or ridiculed is unlikely to stay.
This creates a contradiction. Effort is spent retaining players who break the rules, while new players who are trying to learn the game receive poor treatment.
It is positive to see that admin recruitment has opened up. More moderators can help, but only if they are active, fair, and accountable.
A larger team must also be a better team. Diversity of perspective and consistency in enforcement are critical. Without that, increasing numbers alone will not solve the underlying issues.
There are clear cases of automation that highlight inconsistent enforcement.
For example, the account highlighted here:
https://app.warera.io/article/69f2b35c684895362b6975d4
This case involves two distinct forms of automation.
The first was a market bot that automatically bought underpriced equipment and relisted it at a profit. This behavior was not stopped through moderation action. It only ceased after the account was publicly exposed, at which point the player appears to have stopped it voluntarily, likely to try avoiding a ban.
The second is still ongoing. The account continues to use a simple script, macro, or autoclicker to automatically collect company production 24/7.
This distinction matters. One form of automation stopped only due to public exposure, not enforcement. The other continues without any visible action taken. Ban and fine are both still missing.
It also raises a broader question about what is actually allowed. If basic automation such as autoclicking or simple macros is permitted, that should be clearly stated. If it is not permitted, then enforcement should be consistent regardless of how simple the automation is.
Right now, the lack of clarity creates an uneven playing field. Players who follow the rules are left guessing, while others benefit from automation with little or no consequence.
The phone verification system lacks transparency and has raised concerns within the community.
Players do not know what triggers it. This alone creates uncertainty.
There is also growing suspicion that the system may be manually triggered. Some players report being prompted for phone verification after submitting multiple reports against suspected cheaters.
These cases often involve long standing community members with no history of rule violations, old discord accounts and no signs of present rule violations either, which makes the triggers harder to understand.
At the same time, there are many apparent multi account users in the game. It is unclear how they are consistently bypassing verification, which further undermines confidence in the system, if it's even being triggered for all of them.
If the feature is automated, the criteria should be clarified. If it involves manual intervention, there must be safeguards to prevent misuse.
The core issue is trust.
Players need to trust that reports matter, that rules are enforced fairly, and that moderation is consistent.
Right now, that trust is weakening.
Improving transparency, strengthening enforcement against repeat offenders, treating new players with respect, and clearly defining what is allowed would significantly improve the health of the game.
These are not unrealistic expectations, they are baseline standards for any competitive online game that wants to grow and retain a fair player base.