Forum: empire-en
Board: [818] General Discussion
Topic: [311646] Are we also partly to blame? [RVs will be main focus point]
[-311646]
Iota (AU1) [None]
:: June 24, 2016, 5:18 a.m.
Hey community
Just wanted to post this because its been nagging at my brain for a while.
I've been playing this game for 3 and a half years and I've seen this game go from amazing to somewhat adequate.
Some of you might think I'm putting it lightly because a lot of you on the forums have been throwing a lot of hate at GGS, more now as of late.
However something got me thinking.
I was here way back when the other Kingdoms was introduced, Before the other Kingdoms the game was pretty fun, then came the new kingdoms along with its resource villages and then the game got very interesting.
Suddenly there were new places to experience, more battles to be fought.
Resource villages were everywhere and people were nabbing them up like you could not believe, but there was something different way back then.
People weren't just taking all the RV's, they were also taking them from other players.
Stealing RV's in the day was not an offense that would lead to war.
In fact most people back then were delighting in this apparent tug-of-war that was happening, I enjoyed it thoroughly and I was never butthurt when I lost 3-4 RV's in a single day, because I knew I could without fear of major repercussions attempt to take them back and maybe nab some more.
Then I had to leave for a few months and instead of logging back in I just made a new account altogether and what I came back to was appalling.
All RV's were taken, no one was taking them and I was being kicked from alliance after alliance for trying to take some RV's because my fragile little mind couldn't comprehend that taking RV's was such a bad thing to do.
With that in mind I want to ask you's something.
By declaring the action of grabbing RV's such a hostile action, Did we as the community break part of the game by doing this?
Cause I can certainly assure you that [even though I do not work at GGS] this was not GGS's vision when developing this feature for us.
They made something fun and we bent the rules to profit the more active players.
There's achievements that some players are never going to achieve because we as the community have made it so improbable that it might as well be literally impossible.
With the insistence on Server rules [Might not apply to all servers] Taking monuments and Laboratories is also an offence to make war with.
Seriously?
Its the same with the resource villages, These were meant to be played with like a nice old game of Tug-of-war.
But we didn't even give those a chance.
In all honesty I think GGS knows this is happening and is trying to find a way to break this vicious cycle.
There was an issue about a year ago on Resource villages.
There was reports of hundreds of Shady attacks hitting resource villages in multiple servers in multiple kingdoms.
At first someone just thought someone hit the lottery and decided to use it to wreck havoc but then people started pointing fingers at GGS for the occurrence as it happening on multiple servers seemed like quite a stretch.
If it was actually GGS, I don't blame them even in the slightest [despite my rv's were also hit]
At this point GGS is at an impasse and I don't see what they could do to break this system without upsetting the most persistent of players.
Anyway
That's my rant over, didn't realize how much I had actually typed in such a short time,there's also more I would like to talk about but looking at the size of this post I think most people aren't even going to read up to this point.
I also know that some of you are going to argue with me which is fine, I'm just voicing my opinion which should be welcome.
Kind Regards
iota
Cheers community, I'd like to hear your thoughts on the matter
Just wanted to post this because its been nagging at my brain for a while.
I've been playing this game for 3 and a half years and I've seen this game go from amazing to somewhat adequate.
Some of you might think I'm putting it lightly because a lot of you on the forums have been throwing a lot of hate at GGS, more now as of late.
However something got me thinking.
I was here way back when the other Kingdoms was introduced, Before the other Kingdoms the game was pretty fun, then came the new kingdoms along with its resource villages and then the game got very interesting.
Suddenly there were new places to experience, more battles to be fought.
Resource villages were everywhere and people were nabbing them up like you could not believe, but there was something different way back then.
People weren't just taking all the RV's, they were also taking them from other players.
Stealing RV's in the day was not an offense that would lead to war.
In fact most people back then were delighting in this apparent tug-of-war that was happening, I enjoyed it thoroughly and I was never butthurt when I lost 3-4 RV's in a single day, because I knew I could without fear of major repercussions attempt to take them back and maybe nab some more.
Then I had to leave for a few months and instead of logging back in I just made a new account altogether and what I came back to was appalling.
All RV's were taken, no one was taking them and I was being kicked from alliance after alliance for trying to take some RV's because my fragile little mind couldn't comprehend that taking RV's was such a bad thing to do.
With that in mind I want to ask you's something.
By declaring the action of grabbing RV's such a hostile action, Did we as the community break part of the game by doing this?
Cause I can certainly assure you that [even though I do not work at GGS] this was not GGS's vision when developing this feature for us.
They made something fun and we bent the rules to profit the more active players.
There's achievements that some players are never going to achieve because we as the community have made it so improbable that it might as well be literally impossible.
With the insistence on Server rules [Might not apply to all servers] Taking monuments and Laboratories is also an offence to make war with.
Seriously?
Its the same with the resource villages, These were meant to be played with like a nice old game of Tug-of-war.
But we didn't even give those a chance.
In all honesty I think GGS knows this is happening and is trying to find a way to break this vicious cycle.
There was an issue about a year ago on Resource villages.
There was reports of hundreds of Shady attacks hitting resource villages in multiple servers in multiple kingdoms.
At first someone just thought someone hit the lottery and decided to use it to wreck havoc but then people started pointing fingers at GGS for the occurrence as it happening on multiple servers seemed like quite a stretch.
If it was actually GGS, I don't blame them even in the slightest [despite my rv's were also hit]
At this point GGS is at an impasse and I don't see what they could do to break this system without upsetting the most persistent of players.
Anyway
That's my rant over, didn't realize how much I had actually typed in such a short time,there's also more I would like to talk about but looking at the size of this post I think most people aren't even going to read up to this point.
I also know that some of you are going to argue with me which is fine, I'm just voicing my opinion which should be welcome.
Kind Regards
iota
Cheers community, I'd like to hear your thoughts on the matter
[4467704]
The Carnifex (US1) [US1]
:: June 24, 2016, 6:56 a.m.
Your completely right. But ggs sending shadows would only start wars. Not actually fix the problem. The problem is unfixable because ggs don't control the server lords. They would have to update the game giving a reward for doing it.
[4467757]
Iota (AU1) [None]
:: June 24, 2016, 8:15 a.m.
Gotta give em credit for trying something at the least, even if it was a little unorthodox.Carnifexx (US1) said:Your completely right. But ggs sending shadows would only start wars. Not actually fix the problem. The problem is unfixable because ggs don't control the server lords. They would have to update the game giving a reward for doing it.
Then again, would starting wars really be a bad thing?
GGE is lacking in PvP, nothing like it used to be.
wow, I don't actually recall not being able to see who owned RVs.imspecial456 (US1) said:yeah- the RV "rules" do break the game. once you get them, you get them. However, the game is still broken as GGS add more bugs and events, when really they could fix it up. I believe, no events leads to more PvP, which in turn leads us to take RVs in more fights. However, I think, even though we are to blame for the RV rule, so are GGE, when they removed the feature of not being able to see the owner of an RV from a certain distance
GGS isn't purposely adding bugs into the game, sometimes adding new features into games can really screw with other sections of the game, for no apparent reason which can make bug exterminating really hard.
Also some bugs can only be revealed when they release the update, theres just some things the team won't be able to find on their private testing servers.
Cheers for the responses
[4467762]
mikesmight123 (GB1) [GB1]
:: June 24, 2016, 8:19 a.m.
Or a good pvp event should fix all of this.
[4467954]
Wicked [None]
:: June 24, 2016, 10:57 a.m.
I gotta agree on the majority of what the ot person posted.
And like someone already stated, the only way to take and expand your rvs is to go to war with an alliance,
and then steal them. Although even in war times, people have 'rules' about rvs.
So yea i can understand where you are coming from.
But what kind of solutions do you guys see to make the thing around rvs, better for anyone?
I'm looking out for more answers.
And like someone already stated, the only way to take and expand your rvs is to go to war with an alliance,
and then steal them. Although even in war times, people have 'rules' about rvs.
So yea i can understand where you are coming from.
But what kind of solutions do you guys see to make the thing around rvs, better for anyone?
I'm looking out for more answers.
[4467990]
Wicked [None]
:: June 24, 2016, 11:27 a.m.
Ok, but then it will still lead into war (autowar or even declaring of war) and then u have basiscly the same thing like now? Only difference is that now people know with who they start a war with if they go for the RV and with the -no names-part they don't.imspecial456 (US1) said:so that you cant see the owner. makes more of an interest in defending, except you should only be allowed to attack rRVs with a fraction of the troops you usually would, making it easier to defend
Wouldn't people still be afraid to get into a war? and wouldn't this give the 'big alliances' even more reason of outburning the poor souls who took the rv without knowing they hitted the 'big alliances'?
Trust me, i am following the point, i'm just trying to see it all possible ways.
[4468064]
CM Popeye [None]
:: June 24, 2016, 12:24 p.m.
I actually like the idea of anonymous RV's as it could possibly solve this problem with the unwritten "no stealing rv's" rule. Of course the idea of the rv's was to have people fighting over them, but that is obviously is not how it turned out. I can mention this one to the team, and see what they think.
-Popeye
-Popeye
[4468079]
PowerfullyNix (AU1) [AU1]
:: June 24, 2016, 12:40 p.m.
Hi Every1,
hows u, an interesting discussion item
@imspecial456 (US1) what's wrong u sound a little down from some of the comments
ok wiv regards to RV's, at the moment i believe that Rv 'spawn' (is that the correct terminology) don't happen enuff, they are suppose to happen when people enter new kingdoms however in a previous alliance i know that the last few times when people entered new Kingdoms no 'spawn' or freeRV's actually got created.
And in EW nu or returning players r finding it difficult to get RV's.
Hence some kind of seasonal RV spawning activity needs to happen or an activity within GE that result in freeRV's or spawning RV's being created.
the only other ways of getting RV's is when;
1 u are given them from a player or an alliance because that player is leaving or gone into ruins
2 u want to fight/battle which is really stealing RV's, and because RV's are soo difficult to get when you get them of course people and alliances are protective of them, that's understandable.
xoxoxo Nix xoxoxo
hows u, an interesting discussion item
@imspecial456 (US1) what's wrong u sound a little down from some of the comments
ok wiv regards to RV's, at the moment i believe that Rv 'spawn' (is that the correct terminology) don't happen enuff, they are suppose to happen when people enter new kingdoms however in a previous alliance i know that the last few times when people entered new Kingdoms no 'spawn' or freeRV's actually got created.
And in EW nu or returning players r finding it difficult to get RV's.
Hence some kind of seasonal RV spawning activity needs to happen or an activity within GE that result in freeRV's or spawning RV's being created.
the only other ways of getting RV's is when;
1 u are given them from a player or an alliance because that player is leaving or gone into ruins
2 u want to fight/battle which is really stealing RV's, and because RV's are soo difficult to get when you get them of course people and alliances are protective of them, that's understandable.
xoxoxo Nix xoxoxo
[4468289]
Klingon (RO1) [None]
:: June 24, 2016, 3:31 p.m.
if the rv rule will be solved ill go back to my first server to fully play ...
[4468417]
MightyHawklord (GB1) [GB1]
:: June 24, 2016, 5:17 p.m.
i actually think that when a player goes to ruins they should automagically lose all rv's instead of the alliance 'holding' on to them as surely they are owned by the owner NOT the alliance,
we all know the game, we all know we have to login or you run out of food and lose your men,
why not rv's when its obvious you've not logged in ?
we all know the game, we all know we have to login or you run out of food and lose your men,
why not rv's when its obvious you've not logged in ?
[4468839]
eibbed62 (AU1) [AU1]
:: June 25, 2016, 1:21 a.m.
MightyHawklord (GB1) said:i actually think that when a player goes to ruins they should automagically lose all rv's instead of the alliance 'holding' on to them as surely they are owned by the owner NOT the alliance,
we all know the game, we all know we have to login or you run out of food and lose your men,
why not rv's when its obvious you've not logged in ?
I agree with this. If a player goes to ruins, whilst still holding RVs, they should revert to being unowned. An alliance should be aware if their players haven't logged in for a while and should reallocate any RVs they wish to keep before their player goes to ruins.
Regards,
Debbie
[4468856]
PowerfullyNix (AU1) [AU1]
:: June 25, 2016, 2:18 a.m.
ok with regards to RV's of an alliance member that goes into ruins, if the player/or allianceTreasurer hasn't re-allocated the RV's out by the time that player is black dot, their RV's should re-set to free/un-owned RV's.
that's a fab idea, i like it a lot, suggested by @Wicked , @imspecial456 (US1), @MightyHawklord (GB1)
xoxoxo Nix xoxoxo
that's a fab idea, i like it a lot, suggested by @Wicked , @imspecial456 (US1), @MightyHawklord (GB1)
xoxoxo Nix xoxoxo
[4468876]
Iota (AU1) [None]
:: June 25, 2016, 3:23 a.m.
Can't help but notice that the "Does GGS Suck" part of the discussion title was removed XD
[4468927]
Iota (AU1) [None]
:: June 25, 2016, 6 a.m.
I don't blame them.
If I had a game with a forum I'd probably remove posts that are just targeting the company, not that that was my intention
MightyHawklord (GB1) said:
If I had a game with a forum I'd probably remove posts that are just targeting the company, not that that was my intention
MightyHawklord (GB1) said:
This would also be a good idea.i actually think that when a player goes to ruins they should automagically lose all rv's instead of the alliance 'holding' on to them as surely they are owned by the owner NOT the alliance,
we all know the game, we all know we have to login or you run out of food and lose your men,
why not rv's when its obvious you've not logged in ?
[4469211]
Wicked [None]
:: June 25, 2016, 1:03 p.m.
Thanks for the suggestion guys (ruines part).
i will pass this on for discussion.
any more ideas are still welcome
i will pass this on for discussion.
any more ideas are still welcome
[4470176]
Klingon (RO1) [None]
:: June 26, 2016, 10:05 a.m.
not only rvs are "property" of alli, food op too.
[4470180]
wert855 (IN1) [None]
:: June 26, 2016, 10:27 a.m.
its better make caps of rvs a shadow attack and make them like tokens or khan tabs the defeende and attacker bothowns it some tghing like that
[4470353]
zip (GB1) [None]
:: June 26, 2016, 3:14 p.m.
Everyone here is missing the point of why taking rv's would be considered a war worthy offence. They transform your outers from useless in terms of food production, to 10k+ if you have your bases built right. Hence, anybody running any sort of decent burn could have their troops wiped out overnight by stealing their rv's. Now some of you will jump straight away to saying you should just station defenders there and hold them. The problem is though rv's are undefendable. How are you meant to stop a 6/5 wave attack or even a well tooled 4 waver with a good comm, when you have neither a moat or a WT in place to give you warning.
All it would do is result in alliances hitting rv's rather than castles are why hit a defendable target when you can simply hit 10 soft targets and do as much damage?
All it would do is result in alliances hitting rv's rather than castles are why hit a defendable target when you can simply hit 10 soft targets and do as much damage?
[4471135]
Iota (AU1) [None]
:: June 27, 2016, 11:23 a.m.
I think "stole" is a strong word, I liked your suggestions and added them as a suggestion for GGS to consider.imspecial456 (US1) said:@zip (GB1) that is why I suggested(half the ideas Iota stole from me on a different thread) that you can only use a certain amount of troops. so only about 40 attackers can be sent to each RV, and unlimited defence. watch tower effects will be the same as the main castle, and maybe a moat can be built in RVs for a small amount of resources when you get it, like a button on the ring menu
If you feel strongly about it I'll give you credit
Not sure about you but I went without RV's for a very long time and I was able to do well enough for myself without them.zip (GB1) said:Everyone here is missing the point of why taking rv's would be considered a war worthy offence. They transform your outers from useless in terms of food production, to 10k+ if you have your bases built right. Hence, anybody running any sort of decent burn could have their troops wiped out overnight by stealing their rv's. Now some of you will jump straight away to saying you should just station defenders there and hold them. The problem is though rv's are undefendable. How are you meant to stop a 6/5 wave attack or even a well tooled 4 waver with a good comm, when you have neither a moat or a WT in place to give you warning.
All it would do is result in alliances hitting rv's rather than castles are why hit a defendable target when you can simply hit 10 soft targets and do as much damage?
Well that's the point, you should be defending those Resource Villages so you don't loose an army over night, we did establish that You can't send as many troops, something like a 25-50-25.
The Watchtower in your castle would still account for the RV's obviously.
As for that last sentence I'm not sure I understand, "All it would do is result in alliances hitting RV's rather than castles" Believe it or not the original Idea of the RV's was to actually fight over them, not horde and keep them like family heirlooms.
Also unclear on the very last part unelss the soft part of the RV is that it doesn't have a moat, That issue is accounted for if an enemy can only send a few hundred attackers
[4471197]
ShadowOfEvil (GB1) [None]
:: June 27, 2016, 12:27 p.m.
While I agree it is quite unfair for alliances to ' hoard ' rvs, I think the inclusion of this idea would just further reduce proper PVP as players will be literally chasing after rvs all day