OUTPOSTS ISSUE

tequila101 (INT1)

found this closed discussion:
https://community.goodgamestudios.com/empire/en/discussion/382153/a-disease-thats-enter-game#latest

so these players are crying over lost OPs???

https://prnt.sc/wef79p
https://prnt.sc/wf1z5q




So how do you call this now? 

Pisky (GB1)

seems like something going on between you. There are no defenders, and the op is named getmeifyou can, doesn't seem to be normal cap, so wouldn't like to say who's who!

flug (NL1)

Pisky (GB1) said:

seems like something going on between you. There are no defenders, and the op is named getmeifyou can, doesn't seem to be normal cap, so wouldn't like to say who's who!

Its ATrap Star Wars GIF - ItsATrap Trap StarWars - Discover & Share GIFs (tenor.com)

Pisky (GB1)

I would say that the whole issue is going to get very cloudy

tequila101 (INT1)

Pisky (GB1) said:

seems like something going on between you. There are no defenders, and the op is named getmeifyou can, doesn't seem to be normal cap, so wouldn't like to say who's who!

defenders are not the point. because the photo may show no defenders as they may have cleaned it before the capturing troops land. 

the point is those players in the previous thread are crying and complaining about outposts getting lost by capture and yet they don't see what they do to other players. 

if players want fair play, they should make their post more realistic and not just show one side of the story. 

what they did is just fishing for sympathy.

Pisky (GB1)

The same could be said about your post, being a setup specifically for what you are complaining about, and you didn't address the name, as a come on either.

The trouble with this Op saga is that it never ends well. Having seen it first hand it destroys the game, the enjoyment, and the server, and the only winners will be Stillfront. Its like a wave of ill will that sweeps across the server. Players still argue even now on whether its done intentionally to cause the disruption, and who knows, with conspiracy theories

tequila101 (INT1)

Pisky (GB1) said:

The same could be said about your post, being a setup specifically for what you are complaining about, and you didn't address the name, as a come on either.

The trouble with this Op saga is that it never ends well. Having seen it first hand it destroys the game, the enjoyment, and the server, and the only winners will be Stillfront. Its like a wave of ill will that sweeps across the server. Players still argue even now on whether its done intentionally to cause the disruption, and who knows, with conspiracy theories

good point. 
well i just hope players stay focus on game instead of attacking players in forum.

Sleeper (INT1)

Pisky as you know, its the same problem throughout this game and in every server. Those defending, Metro's, Towers, not so much Capitals, move their mains, then set up Ghosts to protect it. Those that are at war set up Ghosts.  End up with a load of castles, in one area, but only a couple real.

I started in Dec 11, and those in control, had no control  over players setting up more accounts. Putting a Ghost in their enemies alliance, therefore knowing when someone was offline so cheating from the start and it just escalated from there.

It's just one thing after another to try and win. I always wondered why one player and alliance got hundreds of thousands, in Nomads right at the end of the event to win, until I joined an alliance who did the Khan Train.

If  more thought was put in the game, at the beginning, I think we wouldn't have lost thousands of players.

Lucia1 (INT1)

tequila101 (INT1) said:

Pisky (GB1) said:

seems like something going on between you. There are no defenders, and the op is named getmeifyou can, doesn't seem to be normal cap, so wouldn't like to say who's who!

defenders are not the point. because the photo may show no defenders as they may have cleaned it before the capturing troops land. 

the point is those players in the previous thread are crying and complaining about outposts getting lost by capture and yet they don't see what they do to other players. 

if players want fair play, they should make their post more realistic and not just show one side of the story. 

what they did is just fishing for sympathy.

outpost which was captured by our player was empty without any buildings and it belonged to ultimates player before. so account tequila101 first took it from another player. tequila101 is multiaccount owned by mikeru and outpost on which he refers is closest outpost near him main castle.

Lucia1 (INT1)

tequila101 (INT1) said:

found this closed discussion:
https://community.goodgamestudios.com/empire/en/discussion/382153/a-disease-thats-enter-game#latest

so these players are crying over lost OPs???

https://prnt.sc/wef79p
https://prnt.sc/wf1z5q




So how do you call this now? 

tequila101 (INT1) said:

found this closed discussion:
https://community.goodgamestudios.com/empire/en/discussion/382153/a-disease-thats-enter-game#latest

so these players are crying over lost OPs???

https://prnt.sc/wef79p
https://prnt.sc/wf1z5q




So how do you call this now? 

you can check account tequila101. its inactive account not leveling or doing anything, It was created just to take that outpost near player and it was even in ruins that time when was captured. its in alliance with one member - himself and outpost was that time when was captured empty without any buildings. this is some news when multiaccounts complain about stealing outposts which they also stealt before from another player. I think everyone knows difference between taking empty outpost from inactive account and fully built outposts with 30 level granaries, apiary, brewery, barracks level 15 and all ruby buildings

Pisky (GB1)

Your main problem is getting players to listen, then you have to convince support. Bearing in mind the favourite answer is always, its a war game, with NO rules, you will never win. You have to come up with a plan amongst yourselves on how best to play the game, and this can be in a variety of ways. Yes they are spoiling the game, but they arn't worried about it. Try playing it their way which is no Op's, that will also hit Stillfront in the pocket, as players won't be spending on upgrading them, and then, maybe, just maybe, Stillfront may think of other options. If you have no OP's you have less to defend, so they won't be farming you so much either.

Lucia1 (INT1)

I have one question on gge, if player cant steal rubies, coins, tools etc. from another player when he attack him and beat his castle, why is allowed in game to steal something a lot more worth. fully built outpost where were spent a lot of rubies, construction and upgrade tokens, skips, resources, time to build it all. If its allowed to steal all this from someones outpost why its not allowed to steal it from all castles by nomal attacks, if you say its war game. I know its only pixel game, but still outpost have owner. bitcoin is also vitual currency and still its not allowed to steal it. my opinion is that gge is not doing enough to protect players in any way. People are spending quite some money on your game but you act like your custumers have no rights in payback for their money.

tequila101 (INT1)

Lucia1 (INT1) said:

tequila101 (INT1) said:

Pisky (GB1) said:

seems like something going on between you. There are no defenders, and the op is named getmeifyou can, doesn't seem to be normal cap, so wouldn't like to say who's who!

defenders are not the point. because the photo may show no defenders as they may have cleaned it before the capturing troops land. 

the point is those players in the previous thread are crying and complaining about outposts getting lost by capture and yet they don't see what they do to other players. 

if players want fair play, they should make their post more realistic and not just show one side of the story. 

what they did is just fishing for sympathy.

outpost which was captured by our player was empty without any buildings and it belonged to ultimates player before. so account tequila101 first took it from another player. tequila101 is multiaccount owned by mikeru and outpost on which he refers is closest outpost near him main castle.

the point of the matter is the issue of so called "stealing outposts". the OP whether it is developed or undeveloped, it belonged to someone. obviously when it is captured, it is already called stealing. but for some they will simply call it "capture".  OP capture has always been in the game mechanism from day 1. so there shouldn't be any reason why player could complain about it.

no where in the terms of condition of the game that says players can't capture another player's OP if it is already developed.

tequila101 (INT1)

Lucia1 (INT1) said:

I have one question on gge, if player cant steal rubies, coins, tools etc. from another player when he attack him and beat his castle, why is allowed in game to steal something a lot more worth. fully built outpost where were spent a lot of rubies, construction and upgrade tokens, skips, resources, time to build it all. If its allowed to steal all this from someones outpost why its not allowed to steal it from all castles by nomal attacks, if you say its war game. I know its only pixel game, but still outpost have owner. bitcoin is also vitual currency and still its not allowed to steal it. my opinion is that gge is not doing enough to protect players in any way. People are spending quite some money on your game but you act like your custumers have no rights in payback for their money.

again, can you point out a ruling under the terms and condition of the game that OP capture is not allowed when it is developed?

isn't that what other players do when a player is banned, they capture the OP so it is not wasted? 
or when a player quit game and they want to gift a "new" and "upcoming" players with a developed OP to jumpstart his progress?

tequila101 (INT1)

Lucia1 (INT1) said:

tequila101 (INT1) said:

found this closed discussion:
https://community.goodgamestudios.com/empire/en/discussion/382153/a-disease-thats-enter-game#latest

so these players are crying over lost OPs???

https://prnt.sc/wef79p
https://prnt.sc/wf1z5q




So how do you call this now? 

tequila101 (INT1) said:

found this closed discussion:
https://community.goodgamestudios.com/empire/en/discussion/382153/a-disease-thats-enter-game#latest

so these players are crying over lost OPs???

https://prnt.sc/wef79p
https://prnt.sc/wf1z5q




So how do you call this now? 

you can check account tequila101. its inactive account not leveling or doing anything, It was created just to take that outpost near player and it was even in ruins that time when was captured. its in alliance with one member - himself and outpost was that time when was captured empty without any buildings. this is some news when multiaccounts complain about stealing outposts which they also stealt before from another player. I think everyone knows difference between taking empty outpost from inactive account and fully built outposts with 30 level granaries, apiary, brewery, barracks level 15 and all ruby buildings

there is no difference between a developed and underdeveloped OP when it is captured. it is captured. captured. captured plain and simple. players should stop using the word "stealing" when it is captured. 

if your super developed OP is captured, it's the players mistake. why in the first place he had no defenders to defend capture??? and why did the player's alliance where he belong did not help defend it? and when it's captured and lost, you go to forum and start attacking other alliance? this just doesn't makes sense. 

domitsu (GB1)

tequila101 (INT1) said:

if your super developed OP is captured, it's the players mistake. ....

This isn't necessarily true. Depending on the alliance you're in, you cannot stop people capturing your outposts. Sometimes even if you're in a good alliance it can be hard. Clearing 100k defenders off a flag held by a level 12 is no joke

Pisky (GB1)

Its a subject thats raged on all servers at some time, with many for and as many against. Its just another friction/war tools used by Stillfront that will never get changed under present guidelines. Its also a no brainer as to why shells are created to hold these capped Ops. Its also a big tool that could be used in the fight against multi's and shells, and also brings home the reason that Stillfront won't change it, because of course its all about  the  revenue from Multi's and because if Op were stopped from being capped, that revenue and need for those shell accounts would disapear overnight. This is Yet another easy answer on another thread, about why Stillfront will not bring in changes, even though they would be easy to do, and viable for the game, but would of course impede questionable revenue  increased for Stillfront.

I do disagree with maxed Op's being capped by low levels, and of course also by shells on behalf of low levels. This is killing the game as much as anything, as new players learn nothing by suddenly owning a legendary Op, and again this has been ticketed unpteen times to support, with no sensible response. Its because of this I am also against Op's being capped anyway, and it should be staopped, but again it would be so easy to stop, and would keep players in the game. It again raises the questions as to why Stillfront will not stop it, and again raises the question of the long term viabilty of this game, and if Stillfront want it to survive or not. The more these questions and actions reapear you would have to have that thought in your mind, as there are not many alteratives.

Pisky (GB1)

I also notice that withing this argument 1 side is alao asking for a rule quote!.

I would counter that on, you show me a rule quote that takes into concideration all the new changes, and incorperations into players OP's. Some of Stillfronts T&C are no longer fit for purpose, and some no longer fit the parameters of the game. These are being exploited by the Multi-accounters, and shells, that can see how they can be used to their own advantage. Its yet another chosen blank that Stillfront has chosen to ignore within the T&C. We all know that such as this should be changed, and GGEmpire should acknowledge that much of the game, and new inclusions into it, are not what were concidered when they made the rules, or lack of them. The money, time, and resources now put into OP's deserve protection from being exploited by the players that are doing it. I don't think that Stillfront are aware of how many are leaving because of it.

For a game company to allow a situation where a valuble assett such as OP's to be taken by other players who exploit it by creating MultiAccounts(against T&c), and for these assetts to end up being owned by new players, IS WRONG.

Its an oversight that Stillfront need to urgently address, as I can see loopholes in the age of their T&C, and no longer as designed for the game, and being exploited by unscrupulous people within the game.

Daisho

You oddly seem quite obsessed with Stillfront, especially when they have little to no say on what actually goes into the game content/gameplay wise

The op capping issue is a big issue, and we have brought attention to it multiple times, sadly there isn't much else we can do. Just report the players for cheating, and sometimes they get banned. Its not great, I know, but it does work sometimes. 

Pisky (GB1)

Not what Stillfront said when they took over the company, and the Ceo's went to them, they announced that they would have have day to day contol over the company, as they do with all their takeovers, and of course why they reduced the GGE staff as well, as not needed.

Stillfront own the company and as such the game, so choices are theirs to make, and as their own reports say, the games have to produce. So I think your point is not really correct, as you probably know.

I have also written into support quite a few times over this issue, as its been widespread on GB1 for years, my points know are that things have changed and OP's are almost as valuable as main castles, with all the inclusions of relic buildings and prices, and time in upgrades etc, and that the T&C are not fit for purpose with all these new items.

As usual it doesn't take long for some players to find exploits in the game and abuse them, and this is why I think they should be stopped. It would also be a major progression in the fight against Multi-Accounters, and I'm sure you would have to be for that.

I would suggest that players that would like this stopped, contact support and state so.

Daisho

Pisky (GB1) said:

Not what Stillfront said when they took over the company, and the Ceo's went to them, they announced that they would have have day to day contol over the company, as they do with all their takeovers, and of course why they reduced the GGE staff as well, as not needed.

Stillfront own the company and as such the game, so choices are theirs to make, and as their own reports say, the games have to produce. So I think your point is not really correct, as you probably know.

I would love to see an official statement on this, could you show me where you read this?

The press release that Goodgame Studios published says something quite different:

Following recent changes at Goodgame Studios, it is paramount to the founders to provide stability: “No personnel changes are planned at Goodgame Studios. The subsidiaries of the Stillfront Group are run autonomously and Goodgame Studios will also remain as it is today.” Additionally, they see strong synergies on the know-how level. “The games developed by the Stillfront Group’s studios fit perfectly with our extensive marketing know-how and our global distribution network consisting of many thousands of partner websites.”