Forum: empire-en
Board: [818] General Discussion
Topic: [311646] Are we also partly to blame? [RVs will be main focus point]
[4472880]
Iota (AU1) [None]
:: June 29, 2016, 4:40 a.m.
1. You're* X2jim3doors (AU1) said:Skimmed over most posts and cannot believe the stupidity of Iota.
1.Do you seriously think this will help you? Your a bottom feeder because your a lazy player no other reason
2.If your willing to do the hard work and find rv spawns then you will simply lose those rv's under your new proposal to larger alliances/players who actually put the effort/time/money into the game.
3.So form what I can gather, all RV's would look the same, nobody would know who would hold it? If that assumption is correct then whats to stop you mistakenly taking your alliance mates rv's?
4.A better solution would be to come up with a system of actually being able to defend an RV.
2. I probably sit on this for 6 hours a day every day
Also used to pay but I stopped when I realized I had spent 150$ which is too much
In the 2 years I've had this account I've never seen any RV's spawn next to my castle, and I'd know cause I'm on the edge of the map
3. We've done this it was explained in a prior page
4. We've done this one too but you were to lazy to read all the pages [might be confusing this with another thread]
[4472881]
Midnight (AU1) [AU1]
:: June 29, 2016, 4:46 a.m.
I have a question about attacking unmarked RVs. What if you end up attacking one of your own alliance RVs or one that belongs to the member of a pact or NAA? Will there be some way of being notified that you can't attack these? Or is anything up for grabs?
[4472883]
jim3doors (AU1) [None]
:: June 29, 2016, 4:54 a.m.
1. Grammar Nazi, your a sad personIota (AU1) said:1. You're* X2jim3doors (AU1) said:Skimmed over most posts and cannot believe the stupidity of Iota.
1.Do you seriously think this will help you? Your a bottom feeder because your a lazy player no other reason
2.If your willing to do the hard work and find rv spawns then you will simply lose those rv's under your new proposal to larger alliances/players who actually put the effort/time/money into the game.
3.So form what I can gather, all RV's would look the same, nobody would know who would hold it? If that assumption is correct then whats to stop you mistakenly taking your alliance mates rv's?
4.A better solution would be to come up with a system of actually being able to defend an RV.
2. I probably sit on this for 6 hours a day every day
Also used to pay but I stopped when I realized I had spent 150$ which is too much
In the 2 years I've had this account I've never seen any RV's spawn next to my castle, and I'd know cause I'm on the edge of the map
3. We've done this it was explained in a prior page
4. We've done this one too but you were to lazy to read all the pages [might be confusing this with another thread]
2. You sit on this 6 hours a day, for 2 years and still are terrible. Oh you want RV's right next to your castle? Refer to my original post about being lazy.
3. Yea i skimmed over it a lot of it was going in circles
4. I don't live on the forum nor have i read all of its threads
Would only lead to more multi accounts, also what would be the point in having an Alliance / Pact if your unknowingly working against each other?imspecial456 (US1) said:I would say you could see your alliances RVs, however a spy in your alliance might be able to see them and tell others
maybe, you couldn't, and no horns come up, so you cant tell if its your own alliance or not
[4472887]
Iota (AU1) [None]
:: June 29, 2016, 5 a.m.
Not gonna bother with point 2 cause that second part is actually wrong.jim3doors (AU1) said:1. Grammar Nazi, your a sad person
2. You sit on this 6 hours a day, for 2 years and still are terrible. Oh you want RV's right next to your castle? Refer to my original post about being lazy.
3. Yea i skimmed over it a lot of it was going in circles
4. I don't live on the forum nor have i read all of its threads
As for 4, nor do I, I usually hop on the forum once a month just to see how things are going except this past week.
[4472905]
Clexafan8 (US1) [US1]
:: June 29, 2016, 6:29 a.m.
As someone who doesn't have rvs in any of the realms, I honestly don't care that I don't have them. You can still play hard in those realms without the rvs. Who cares if you don't complete the achievement straight away. New Rvs do spawn you just have to be patient and fast enough to grab them when they do. Keep looking you never know if a new one will spawn.
If it goes to a free for all the no-one will be able to have any of the RV's Australia 1 server is a rather small server so changing the status quo is just plain stupid. It is very hard to defend those rvs, and even harder to maintain them so I have been told by my friends on the server that do have rvs. So if that is the case I am not bothered with the hassle they bring when some little random kid new to the game comes on an steals it, and even those who have been playing along time in this game that know better still do it, and suffer a good burning and so they should be for not following the rules of the game.
The player made rules are there to make the game more fair and balanced. if you are so desperate for a resource village to get the achievement why don'[t you just ask those who do have a big number of RV's if you can borrow them to do the achievement then they can get the rv back. That way there is no conflict or war. and You and your fellow alliance members can continue play fire free unless they stuff up themselves.
If it goes to a free for all the no-one will be able to have any of the RV's Australia 1 server is a rather small server so changing the status quo is just plain stupid. It is very hard to defend those rvs, and even harder to maintain them so I have been told by my friends on the server that do have rvs. So if that is the case I am not bothered with the hassle they bring when some little random kid new to the game comes on an steals it, and even those who have been playing along time in this game that know better still do it, and suffer a good burning and so they should be for not following the rules of the game.
The player made rules are there to make the game more fair and balanced. if you are so desperate for a resource village to get the achievement why don'[t you just ask those who do have a big number of RV's if you can borrow them to do the achievement then they can get the rv back. That way there is no conflict or war. and You and your fellow alliance members can continue play fire free unless they stuff up themselves.
[4472928]
HeavyGhost (INT3) [INT3]
:: June 29, 2016, 7:16 a.m.
I think rv/outposts are a no go area some are passed to members by the alliance as a reward so there fore remain the alliances property
we all or most of us do not attack them as they are hard to get and has always been first in best dressed
we all or most of us do not attack them as they are hard to get and has always been first in best dressed
[4472962]
Fisful Of Steel (AU1) [AU1]
:: June 29, 2016, 8:09 a.m.
I agree with the majority of posts, It is a stupid idea, I think the reasons have already been covered why its a stupid idea so I don't need to type out things already mentioned. The system has been tried and tested that is in place atm and seems to work well. While it is nice to have rvs, they are not necessary, if you are a active player that loots regulary it is quite easy to maintain other realm castles from hitting rbc for loot.
[4473034]
DarkBeardo74 (AU1) [None]
:: June 29, 2016, 9:21 a.m.
perryl (US1) said:No worries. I just asked for the top alliances on USA And AU to provide their opinions by tagging them. I don't know if Serry would respond, but the rest should.Iota (AU1) said:As I'm working my way down the list from the top alliances, I can see that its obvious that some alliances are not going to share this message in hopes that they won't find out and possibly loose all their precious RVs
So I'm sending a message to the leaders and then scoping out a general/s that doesn't hold any RVs
This would change nothing for us. Nobody would touch our RVs. We would bookmark them and still declare on alliances that capped them. We would obliterate your entire alliance and take every RV. Nothing changes, if anything you make it worse for yourself.
perryl (US1) said:
Now, let me tell you why the RV rules benefit you more than they do me.
As an extremely active player that has basically unlimited gold and rubies I can easily take every RV owned by your alliance, by myself. Simply take and drop. Forget your alliance. I can clear out the whole server if we're talking AU1.
I am not allowed to cap RVs from players, even though I very easily could. Sure, you might argue that you can cap RVs too, but do you have the ability to cap 300 at the same time? Most of you don't. Level 10 VIPs do. Especially if those level 10 VIPs have fast troops like macemen, or can loot heavy in winter.
I agree, GGS never intended for it to be this way. I am one who is opposed to player-made rules, but I am opposed to them because I would benefit if they didn't exist.
I'm totally for any of these changes. Why? Because I would cause chaos. Total chaos. It's nothing for me to train 20k macemen and send attacks that are so fast you can't defend. Even if you do defend. Ask anyone who has been on the receiving end of my untooled macemen attacks. They hurt.
These rules were put in place to put a leash on the whales. Go ahead. Remove the restrictions that make it possible for you to actually play the game.
There you have it in a nutshell from one of the strongest players on the server and one of the leaders of one of the strongest alliances.
If the ownership markers are removed you are playing russian roulette with your entire alliance and all of the rv's it already has and all from attacking one rv whose owner could be anyone. Might be safe this time but what about the next one?
Removing the restriction on stealing them also has the same effect but differently. As some-one else said, you would be exchanging one monopoly for another. There would be no way you could safely retake an rv taken by the "whales" as perryl called them. Also when they have their fill, as most already do, there is nothing stopping them from just handing them to other members of their alliance, members of their training alliances, members of their pact agreements. Even retaking them then would be fraught with danger, the original stealers might take exception to your interferance and burn you and your alliance to the ground for it.
I for one would rather be burnt for my own actions than because some little upstart level 40 decides he wants an rv and takes one just to see what it does.
A better idea would be since some-one has said the numbers are dwindling in the other empires, haven't seen it but who knows, would be for GGS to rig a reverse spawn type thing in that case. Less players in there means a lower maximum number of rv's per player with the extras being released to go to anyone. I know this idea will make me less than popular with the "whales" but it is still a safer and better bet than the free for all or changed monopoly that has been proposed. It may even lead to outside recuitment into the game.
Forgive the nested quotes for as a first time poster I don't know how to seperate them and had no idea how to prevent it.
[4473038]
schneider (AU1) [None]
:: June 29, 2016, 9:23 a.m.
I was here before the computer version was even released. And i know that it would pull the Strong guys down a notch or two, which is perfect for us who cant find any Res villages, i think that it would be completely suicidal to AUS 1 if these rules came on.
more people would focus on grabbing every RV they could and forget about the events and their msgs would be spammed and lost valuable msgs. If we took these rules out, guess what u thinks gonna happen. No-ones gonna have any RV except for the top few alliances. They would take all your RVs from you if u were in a smaller alliance and yes, you would try to take it back. But they would just retaliate and attack u in all castles. Talk about Lesky and Perryl.
How about take each others OPs whenever you want? whats wrong with that then. My point is basically, noone would have RVs except for the top few alliances
more people would focus on grabbing every RV they could and forget about the events and their msgs would be spammed and lost valuable msgs. If we took these rules out, guess what u thinks gonna happen. No-ones gonna have any RV except for the top few alliances. They would take all your RVs from you if u were in a smaller alliance and yes, you would try to take it back. But they would just retaliate and attack u in all castles. Talk about Lesky and Perryl.
How about take each others OPs whenever you want? whats wrong with that then. My point is basically, noone would have RVs except for the top few alliances
[4473048]
perryl (US1) [US1]
:: June 29, 2016, 9:36 a.m.
He can't. I promise. lolmakale (AU1) said:Then you can have all the RVs you want !! (if you can hold them....which i doubt!!)
tumeke (AU1) said:Not sure if you understand the game, Mak.
Rv spawns are triggered by player population within each realm, GGE do not dictate when it will trigger.
GGS writes the code. So by default, yes they do control it. They could modify the algorithm to work differently. That's literally exactly what they do.
Iota (AU1) said:a 6 waver.....
You'd only be able to send 600 troops max [not including gems]
Pretty defendable
Try 368.... per wave. You're amazingly inexperienced and trying to tell us what's up. Meanwhile, you don't know one iota.
Need me to add that up for you? By the way, that's without gems. Oh, btw, I have 18 90/90 commanders. Oh, let's not forget they all have enough speed to match the tools. Right, those unlimited shield walls will help too.
Go for it. Defend.
30 dollars + 4 hours = winning nomads/sams. Done it 10 times or so.Iota (AU1) said:
2. I probably sit on this for 6 hours a day every day
Also used to pay but I stopped when I realized I had spent 150$ which is too much
In the 2 years I've had this account I've never seen any RV's spawn next to my castle, and I'd know cause I'm on the edge of the map
Correct. I will cap and drop every RV on the server, repeatedly. All day, every day.FabulousLaura (AU1) said:
If it goes to a free for all the no-one will be able to have any of the RV's Australia
[4473055]
schneider (AU1) [None]
:: June 29, 2016, 9:43 a.m.
I was playing this game even before the computer version was even released. But during the tim ei have been here i know that the RV rule that was put in place was put in place for a damn good reason. Sure if free RV taking was here then those really good players would step down a notch or two but even then, it would be suicidal.
think about it. IF they were all up fro grabs, who do u think would take them? Obviously the Best and strongest players and their alliance. Here we are left with top top 3 alliances with all the RVs. and even worse, this dosent take down the war rule. if somoene takes one of their RVs, all they are going to do is burn all their mates and their's castles so they cant get the RV back. This is the type of Donald trump Policy i dont like
think about it. IF they were all up fro grabs, who do u think would take them? Obviously the Best and strongest players and their alliance. Here we are left with top top 3 alliances with all the RVs. and even worse, this dosent take down the war rule. if somoene takes one of their RVs, all they are going to do is burn all their mates and their's castles so they cant get the RV back. This is the type of Donald trump Policy i dont like
[4473057]
perryl (US1) [US1]
:: June 29, 2016, 9:44 a.m.
What makes you think it would bring me down a notch or two?schneider (AU1) said:I was here before the computer version was even released. And i know that it would pull the Strong guys down a notch or two, which is perfect for us who cant find any Res villages, i think that it would be completely suicidal to AUS 1 if these rules came on.
more people would focus on grabbing every RV they could and forget about the events and their msgs would be spammed and lost valuable msgs. If we took these rules out, guess what u thinks gonna happen. No-ones gonna have any RV except for the top few alliances. They would take all your RVs from you if u were in a smaller alliance and yes, you would try to take it back. But they would just retaliate and attack u in all castles. Talk about Lesky and Perryl.
How about take each others OPs whenever you want? whats wrong with that then. My point is basically, noone would have RVs except for the top few alliances
I encourage this change, for all the wrong reasons. You wouldn't affect me. LOL. I maintain -20k in my sleep. 200 rubies per hit with slowdown, no issue. If all my RVs were gone I could just buy food. 5k food for 900 rubies. Come on. You guys miss the point entirely.
The strongest players on this server don't even need RVs. Sure, they benefit us, but it's not a necessity. We can just buy what RVs give us, or loot it. I don't even loot in outers, cba.
Any of the players I consider strong wouldn't be concerned. Go ahead, take an RV from us. Anonymous or not. we're going to find out who it was and burn you. Hell, they could even make it so a RV moved after it was capped. We would just burn everyone then.
[4473058]
schneider (AU1) [None]
:: June 29, 2016, 9:46 a.m.
How do u reply lol?
but anyways, thats my point exactly, we wont have any RVs anymore, if u guys just took them all and we tried to take it, we would all get burned and this is the sort of DOnald Trump Bullshit we are talking about now
but anyways, thats my point exactly, we wont have any RVs anymore, if u guys just took them all and we tried to take it, we would all get burned and this is the sort of DOnald Trump Bullshit we are talking about now
[4473060]
schneider (AU1) [None]
:: June 29, 2016, 9:47 a.m.
and we non gemmers dont have the sort of time and money u guys have. We play casually for fun and there wont be much of it when we are getting hammered down by you guys.
[4473067]
Ian Cook (AU1) [None]
:: June 29, 2016, 9:53 a.m.
ok nix you said that if a player online activity goes to the black dot, then that players RV's should be available to everyone.
i must say that is an incredibly silly idea for e.g. if someone wanted was away for 7+ days on vacation then they would loose all of their hard earned RV's and if the alliance caps his RV's the effort of organising the re-caps would rediculous
i think that RV's in an alliance should stay in that alliance because it is an alliance effort to cap the RVs during an alliance Spawn and During an Alliance War
but i do like the idea of stealing Rv's being a grey area
i must say that is an incredibly silly idea for e.g. if someone wanted was away for 7+ days on vacation then they would loose all of their hard earned RV's and if the alliance caps his RV's the effort of organising the re-caps would rediculous
i think that RV's in an alliance should stay in that alliance because it is an alliance effort to cap the RVs during an alliance Spawn and During an Alliance War
but i do like the idea of stealing Rv's being a grey area
[4473068]
perryl (US1) [US1]
:: June 29, 2016, 9:54 a.m.
I don't cap anybody's RVs. I'm fine with that, but I'm also fully ready to take every RV in sight too.schneider (AU1) said:How do u reply lol?
but anyways, thats my point exactly, we wont have any RVs anymore, if u guys just took them all and we tried to take it, we would all get burned and this is the sort of DOnald Trump Bullshit we are talking about now
schneider (AU1) said:and we non gemmers dont have the sort of time and money u guys have. We play casually for fun and there wont be much of it when we are getting hammered down by you guys.
The funny thing is that all my gems were free. All my equipment - free. I spent significantly less than you all think I do. I just time my purchases very carefully and always buy during an event bonus or relevant special.
I've won Sams and Nomads each several times with 30 dollars each time.
If you can afford internet then you can afford to spend as much as I do. My play is casual, but I do log in daily. Truth is, if you can't afford to spend $30 on the game occasionally then you probably can't afford the time it takes to play. My time is worth significantly more than the money I spent on this game in that same amount of time. If I'm going to carve out 4 hours to hit then the 30 dollars I spend on bonus is the least of my concerns. I don't know what your time is worth, but I suspect it's worth more than 10 dollars an hour.
[4473075]
schneider (AU1) [None]
:: June 29, 2016, 9:59 a.m.
i have money and internet bperryl (US1) said:
I have money and internet but i dont have like 4h time to play this game. I have school believe it or not. But yes i have been a victim of untooled macemen attacks but see hwo it goes when you have no more opponents. take this into mind. Over the years i have been playing, the players have been dwindling not increasing, i wonder why eh?I don't cap anybody's RVs. I'm fine with that, but I'm also fully ready to take every RV in sight too.schneider (AU1) said:How do u reply lol?
but anyways, thats my point exactly, we wont have any RVs anymore, if u guys just took them all and we tried to take it, we would all get burned and this is the sort of DOnald Trump Bullshit we are talking about nowschneider (AU1) said:and we non gemmers dont have the sort of time and money u guys have. We play casually for fun and there wont be much of it when we are getting hammered down by you guys.
The funny thing is that all my gems were free. All my equipment - free. I spent significantly less than you all think I do. I just time my purchases very carefully and always buy during an event bonus or relevant special.
I've won Sams and Nomads each several times with 30 dollars each time.
If you can afford internet then you can afford to spend as much as I do. My play is casual, but I do log in daily. Truth is, if you can't afford to spend $30 on the game occasionally then you probably can't afford the time it takes to play. My time is worth significantly more than the money I spent on this game in that same amount of time. If I'm going to carve out 4 hours to hit then the 30 dollars I spend on bonus is the least of my concerns. I don't know what your time is worth, but I suspect it's worth more than 10 dollars an hour.
[4473076]
gazz65 (GB1) [GB1]
:: June 29, 2016, 10:01 a.m.
Think its just lazy from players who think because they have no rvs is
to just take someones else's and do it by hiding.
But why not put big RED HORN next to Iota ear and every time he gets incoming on
his rvs he will hear it coming loud and clear. which will be every minute of the day.
to just take someones else's and do it by hiding.
But why not put big RED HORN next to Iota ear and every time he gets incoming on
his rvs he will hear it coming loud and clear. which will be every minute of the day.
[4473109]
perryl (US1) [US1]
:: June 29, 2016, 10:35 a.m.
If you can't muster up 4 hours occasionally to play the game then why are you even complaining? Clearly, you already know the problem.schneider (AU1) said:i have money and internet bperryl (US1) said:I have money and internet but i dont have like 4h time to play this game. I have school believe it or not. But yes i have been a victim of untooled macemen attacks but see hwo it goes when you have no more opponents. take this into mind. Over the years i have been playing, the players have been dwindling not increasing, i wonder why eh?I don't cap anybody's RVs. I'm fine with that, but I'm also fully ready to take every RV in sight too.schneider (AU1) said:How do u reply lol?
but anyways, thats my point exactly, we wont have any RVs anymore, if u guys just took them all and we tried to take it, we would all get burned and this is the sort of DOnald Trump Bullshit we are talking about nowschneider (AU1) said:and we non gemmers dont have the sort of time and money u guys have. We play casually for fun and there wont be much of it when we are getting hammered down by you guys.
The funny thing is that all my gems were free. All my equipment - free. I spent significantly less than you all think I do. I just time my purchases very carefully and always buy during an event bonus or relevant special.
I've won Sams and Nomads each several times with 30 dollars each time.
If you can afford internet then you can afford to spend as much as I do. My play is casual, but I do log in daily. Truth is, if you can't afford to spend $30 on the game occasionally then you probably can't afford the time it takes to play. My time is worth significantly more than the money I spent on this game in that same amount of time. If I'm going to carve out 4 hours to hit then the 30 dollars I spend on bonus is the least of my concerns. I don't know what your time is worth, but I suspect it's worth more than 10 dollars an hour.
School takes up 24 hours of your day? Wow. That's a crappy school. Would you believe I have businesses to run and things I do with my life too? Who knew.
If you can't defend against untooled macemen attacks it's because you don't have a good offline setup or you don't understand how to defend.
Several people have successfully defended. When they do I end up taking out like 2 troops. Not my fault you don't know how to defend, are not active enough to defend, and don't have an alliance that will notify you of incoming.
Hit me with a real attack and I will get a text message. I don't need to be online.
If you can't carve out 4 hours for hitting then, again, why are you even complaining? The game is on for 24 hours a day, the events are always there, what excuse do you even have? None. None at all. You complain that active players play the game when you can't because you're too busy with school after school. That's not our problem.
[4473110]
TurtleHunter (AU1) [AU1]
:: June 29, 2016, 10:36 a.m.
i personally do not like the idea but calling people stupid doesn't mean anything. Iota just brought up a valid argument which we have decided we do no like. @jim3doors (AU1), not going to help calling Iota stupid, some people are not lazy. i have met people far from it they just don't know exactly what they are doing. helping rather than insulting will work better. look around, so many people have posted and you are one of the only ones being insulting. perhaps bring iit down a little. @ CM Arcanine. can you please close this thread soon.