Home Ideas, Suggestions & Feedback

We need new Moderators!


ModeratorWe are always on the lookout for talented people to join the team. That means you! If you think you could help us organise and inform the community while entertaining everyone then apply. We need people to help out on the forum, behind the scenes with announcements, on Discord and on our other Social Media channels.


If this is something you think might be of interest to you, HERE

New attack regulations to prevent bullying

I've seen cases where a player of a considerable level (considerable as in high enough to harvest a good amount of resources, but too low to be able to raise a good army) gets attacked by much larger players, sometimes continuously, making it impossible for the attacked player to get back on his/her feet.

Some measures are in place to prevent the same player from attacking continually (there's a time frame after each attack within which the attacker can't attack the same castle), but they don't stop various players from creating a continuous stream of attacks on the same person.

And now you'll tell me that that's what alliances are for, that every player should join a good alliance for protection, that sometimes a strong player with a reprehensible conduct needs to be taught a lesson and the smaller players need to create a continuous stream of attacks on that player to be able to defeat him/her, and that's all good. But what about the big players picking on the little guys? What if the little guys can't join a big alliance because they have entry requirements, like a certain level or a certain amount of honor? What if the big alliances are simply too far away? Besides, why can't new alliances grow and prosper and help the smaller players without being crushed mercilessly by the big dogs?

I think there should be some limits. I know attacks are a big part of the game, but some players just don't know when to stop. Here are the measures that I propose:

- A player should only be able to lose a limited number of defense battles per day. Let's say six times. After that, nobody can attack that player until 24 hours pass since the first attack occurred. (If a player is attacked 5 times and the sixth comes right before the end of the 24 hours... then that's just foul luck, mate!)
- If a player wants to attack the same castle every time, the protection time should increase each time the enemy castle is attacked.
- The protection time of a defeated castle should be greater than that of a castle who had a successful defense.
- Rather than just keep the system of honor penalties when we attack a player much smaller than us, we should simply be forbidden to attack them. Great Darius suggested a formula to calculate which players around us we can attack:

SomeFactor * (abs(My Level-Target Level)+(TargetHonor/100)) / distance

Although I don't think distance should be that important. What if there are no attackable players around us for many miles? That would be mighty unfortunate, and unlucky, yet we must be able to attack somebody!
- If not the formula, GranteD suggested bigger honor penalties and loot penalties. Let's say the loot you get from an attack is relative to the honor you gain. If the honor is positive, then you get as much as you can carry. If it's neutral you get half. If it's negative, you get nothing.

Tell me what you think (be nice, even if your comment is disapproving).

PS: Credits to Great Darius and GranteD for helping with the measures and suggesting I create this thread.
Post edited by LilithMarleen2 on
LilithMarleen @ WWW 2
«1345

Comments

  • Great DariusGreat Darius Posts: 25
    edited 19.04.2012
    Very well put. I guess I've already voted up for this :)
    Great Darius @ w2 @ en1
    20fe53d6b6c68e30bb286c8f51b33f79.gif
  • LilithMarleen2LilithMarleen2 Posts: 5
    edited 19.04.2012
    Very well put. I guess I've already voted up for this :)

    Thank you ;)
    LilithMarleen @ WWW 2
  • UltimateKing23UltimateKing23 Posts: 188
    edited 19.04.2012
    good idea but i think that if the attack is from a 20 lvl difference than they should only be able to attack 1ce or twice
    UltimateKing23 @ English 1 as The centurion.
    "for lo the riotous shall live by their faith" Romans Chapter 1 end

    look at my join date. im a real wise one.

    There is no need to over react about a suggestion. if you do well you have anger issues and should try to say no with a constuctive argument. No offence given.
  • LilithMarleen2LilithMarleen2 Posts: 5
    edited 19.04.2012
    good idea but i think that if the attack is from a 20 lvl difference than they should only be able to attack 1ce or twice

    I agree, but I don't think one can impose many criteria, I don't know how complex the programming is for this game. That would involve keeping many variables as memory records, to keep track of how many times a player has attacked another, and maybe that would compromise game performance.

    Maybe if a player has 20 levels on another he shouldn't be able to attack at all, if that formula is implemented :)
    LilithMarleen @ WWW 2
  • LegoNenenLegoNenen Posts: 98
    edited 19.04.2012
    something like this would be nice.
    but it needs tweaking but i am not sure ecxaclty what.
    LegoNenen Castle Of Legon @ World 1
    LegoNenen Castle Of Legon @ English 1
    Empire Guild OLD Applying Center (The Guild is Gone)

    Do not Flame,Spam,or Troll. it is not good or nice to do that.
    The Bible can only be read one way, do not twist the words just to suit your own ideas. (Or anybody's else)


    I try to make my Posts EASIER to READ
    by using these things
    You use it too!

    I Like Star Trek,Star Wars ,Legos , And much more
  • LilithMarleen2LilithMarleen2 Posts: 5
    edited 19.04.2012
    LegoNenen wrote: »
    something like this would be nice.
    but it needs tweaking but i am not sure ecxaclty what.

    I am open to suggestions :P
    LilithMarleen @ WWW 2
  • smartacus (GB1)smartacus (GB1) Posts: 5
    edited 19.04.2012
    There is an alliance that describe themselves as heroes but have created a desert around them as they have destroyed all players in their area. They broke truce with our alliance and are 10 levels above I have had 2 mins warning of heavy cross bows in 100s coming against me over 48 hours we take troops out for walks as they attack then repair damage. They are playing to annihilation of opposition not for points or honour. The big players we know have not wanted to help. This alliance need to be taken out of the game. They are horrendous bullies how they are allowed to cause probably young kids to see themselves destroyed with no mercy is beyond me
    smartacus @ WWW 2
  • NightdeathNightdeath Posts: 1
    edited 19.04.2012
    omg smartacus u attacked my alot after i jsut started and now u get mad that we attack u, u started this whole thing and now u are to big a coward to see it all the way through
    Nightdeath @ WWW 2
  • Danger1602Danger1602 Posts: 633
    edited 19.04.2012
    Yes!!!!!!!!!!
    Danger1602 World 1
    I am part of the BLACK HAWKS family in the mother alliance attack us or me and you will feel our TALONS
    bow down to BLACK HAWKS
    here is our website http://blackhawksfamilyagoodgameempirefamilyofalliancesininternational.yolasite.com/ and contact us here http://blackhawksfamily.freeforums.org/index.php at our forum
    I am smart strong and stealthy
    I LOVE TURTLES
    check out my youtube videos our best one is the life of cheif the tortoise

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]thought to be slow but fast
  • GranteDGranteD Posts: 31
    edited 20.04.2012
    - A player should only be attackable a limited number of times per day. Let's say six times. After that, nobody can attack that player until 24 hours pass since the first attack occurred. (If a player is attacked 5 times and the sixth comes right before the end of the 24 hours... then that's just foul luck, mate!)
    - If a player wants to attack the same castle every time, the protection time should increase each time the enemy castle is attacked.
    - The protection time of a defeated castle should be greater than that of a castle who had a successful defense.
    - Rather than just keep the system of honor penalties when we attack a player much smaller than us, we should simply be forbidden to attack them. Great Darius suggested a formula to calculate which players around us we can attack:

    SomeFactor * abs(My Level-Target Level) / distance

    Although I don't think distance should be that important. What if there are no attackable players around us for many miles? That would be mighty unfortunate, and unlucky, yet we must be able to attack somebody!

    here is my opinion

    for the 1st one I don't agree with it because in high level player wars we need to attack a lot to bring them down so if you can be attacked 6 times a day no way he will lose and trust me I seen a castle with 5900 defender consist off Halberdiers and Longbowmans.That many defenders can only be attack 6 times not a match.So,no for me for 1st one.

    2nd one I agrees completely.end of story

    3rd one agreed

    4th one is no but if you tweaked the formula that if they attack low level players with low honour that will minus like 300 honour points that will make them think twice to attack.Also,I assumming some of them bullied because of looting because other than no honour point get or deducted and no glory points what did they get which points to looting so how about no looting also for low level players against high level players,so they don't get glory,honour and loot and there is no purpose for them to attack low levels only wasting coins and tools.

    Sorry,if some of my words are uncomfortable,just want to be understood.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • smartacus (GB1)smartacus (GB1) Posts: 5
    edited 20.04.2012
    Look at Kramzee castle and tell me if there is anyone else on the board around United Heroes, what has happened to the players !! Since posting this they have all attacked my main castle I am going to let it continue to burn as an example of cyber bullies. They have made war on 2 Alliances 600 distance threatened to wipe them out. They are not playing for honour but to be the only ones on the map. It is so important to confront attitudes. It seems obvious from their response here and on the board, just look it says it all
    smartacus @ WWW 2
  • Great DariusGreat Darius Posts: 25
    edited 20.04.2012
    GranteD wrote: »
    for the 1st one I don't agree with it because in high level player wars we need to attack a lot to bring them down so if you can be attacked 6 times a day no way he will lose and trust me I seen a castle with 5900 defender consist off Halberdiers and Longbowmans.That many defenders can only be attack 6 times not a match.So,no for me for 1st one.

    That's true. I think/hope he meant if they lose 6 battles. Can you clear that for us LilithMarleen2?
    Great Darius @ w2 @ en1
    20fe53d6b6c68e30bb286c8f51b33f79.gif
  • KramZe2KramZe2 Posts: 1
    edited 20.04.2012
    smartacus wrote: »
    Look at Kramzee castle and tell me if there is anyone else on the board around United Heroes, what has happened to the players !! Since posting this they have all attacked my main castle I am going to let it continue to burn as an example of cyber bullies. They have made war on 2 Alliances 600 distance threatened to wipe them out. They are not playing for honour but to be the only ones on the map. It is so important to confront attitudes. It seems obvious from their response here and on the board, just look it says it all

    Actually Its funny how you go flame here.. First this war started because of something between you and Nightdeath.. I guess you don't understand.. The next is that its actually to protect another low alliance who asked us to wipe your ass.. And that alliance begged 3-4 alliance for help which none responded on.. There is none around me because of inactivity.. I haven't been pilliaging and wanting to destroy other than you.. So actually we are turning the bullying around and you go to whine on forums.. Think you should ask the "little guy" you attacked how his alliance feels about you bullying them.. I guess he is in the same situation..
    I think this actually can be tweaked.. get us some catapults and make 6 defeat daily :)
    KramZe @ WWW 2
  • smartacus (GB1)smartacus (GB1) Posts: 5
    edited 20.04.2012
    Great a lesson learnt, already made a statement to you that the castle in question was replenished as I realized he was still in the game. Usually an accused has an accusation to answer never knew what that was. Before being "punished". And the other members of my Alliance attacked by your higher level had no idea of your high moral ground.Other alliances actually helped dialogue, which can be useful in understanding how the game works before being attacked with overwhelming force. And your threats to the second "lower level" alliance again an example that you do not bully, because heroes pick fights with same size Alliances whereas cowards dominate the weak. If there was any justice in your cause it should have been with me alone, as it was I had already sought to make amends.
    smartacus @ WWW 2
  • LilithMarleen2LilithMarleen2 Posts: 5
    edited 20.04.2012
    That's true. I think/hope he meant if they lose 6 battles. Can you clear that for us LilithMarleen2?

    Yes that is accurate. A castle's defenses shouldn't be wiped out and the buildings left burning more than six times a day.
    LilithMarleen @ WWW 2
  • edited 21.04.2012
    I've seen cases where a player of a considerable level (considerable as in high enough to harvest a good amount of resources, but too low to be able to raise a good army) gets attacked by much larger players, sometimes continuously, making it impossible for the attacked player to get back on his/her feet.

    Some measures are in place to prevent the same player from attacking continually (there's a time frame after each attack within which the attacker can't attack the same castle), but they don't stop various players from creating a continuous stream of attacks on the same person.

    And now you'll tell me that that's what alliances are for, that every player should join a good alliance for protection, that sometimes a strong player with a reprehensible conduct needs to be taught a lesson and the smaller players need to create a continuous stream of attacks on that player to be able to defeat him/her, and that's all good. But what about the big players picking on the little guys? What if the little guys can't join a big alliance because they have entry requirements, like a certain level or a certain amount of honor? What if the big alliances are simply too far away? Besides, why can't new alliances grow and prosper and help the smaller players without being crushed mercilessly by the big dogs?

    I think there should be some limits. I know attacks are a big part of the game, but some players just don't know when to stop. Here are the measures that I propose:

    - A player should only be able to lose a limited number of defense battles per day. Let's say six times. After that, nobody can attack that player until 24 hours pass since the first attack occurred. (If a player is attacked 5 times and the sixth comes right before the end of the 24 hours... then that's just foul luck, mate!)
    - If a player wants to attack the same castle every time, the protection time should increase each time the enemy castle is attacked.
    - The protection time of a defeated castle should be greater than that of a castle who had a successful defense.
    - Rather than just keep the system of honor penalties when we attack a player much smaller than us, we should simply be forbidden to attack them. Great Darius suggested a formula to calculate which players around us we can attack:

    SomeFactor * abs(My Level-Target Level) / distance

    Although I don't think distance should be that important. What if there are no attackable players around us for many miles? That would be mighty unfortunate, and unlucky, yet we must be able to attack somebody!
    - If not the formula, GranteD suggested bigger honor penalties and loot penalties. Let's say the loot you get from an attack is relative to the honor you gain. If the honor is positive, then you get as much as you can carry. If it's neutral you get half. If it's negative, you get nothing.

    Tell me what you think (be nice, even if your comment is disapproving).

    PS: Credits to Great Darius and GranteD for helping with the measures and suggesting I create this thread.

    no there is a good idea but loopholes that would make it so this makes little difference
  • albastrel6albastrel6 Posts: 510
    edited 21.04.2012
    I have the same problem i am attacked over and over but when i sleep so i cant defend myself when i am sleeping !!! And it gets kind of boring and annoying and it makes me fell like I don't want to play this game anymore. Belive me if you look at my castle 22 buildings are burning!!! find me in world 2 my name is albastrel6 coordinates 301 : 960 also i will give you the coordinates of my attackers the first one: 286:948 the second one :315:948 i mean they are all from the alliance ELITE-FIGHTERS and they have 15 members AND THEY ALL ATTACK ME!!!
  • smartacus (GB1)smartacus (GB1) Posts: 5
    edited 21.04.2012
    Kramzee claims that 100% of players round his United Heroes all had the same thought and gave up. How strange the only place on the map where 100s of players had the same thought. We ran rings around him for 3 days sending troops out to Disney Land when we saw him coming. Then we noticed a glitch in the system that allowed him "10 levels above us" to attack with 2 mins notice. Useful glitch when you already have overwhelming armies attacking non ruby players that have caused no offence, ( he is a defender of morality read his Alliance statement). Can someone explain the 2 mins notice attack maybe its a cheat " perish the thought. So when I come on the forum I get overwhelming attacks from 3 of his players in the night, because he is exposed. albestrel6 send a message to your attackers questioning their motives, it may be a common theme that once exposed their response is the same as United Heroes. Not content with my castle burning Nightdeath " pleasant name" still spies me out.
    smartacus @ WWW 2
  • KingWhiteFangKingWhiteFang Posts: 120
    edited 21.04.2012
    bad idea i understand that you try to protect small players but i think that this is too much
    KingWhiteFang WWW 1

    Proud Deputy of HA~COBRA Venom

    I am against the new spy reports + NEW MAP and constantly buggy updates. Please revoke. Also if you are against this too add it to your Signature so that GGE will realize that we don't want it! GGS please talk to the Community before doing future updates and get their opinion on things first.

    Experience: more than 2 years of playing
    Maximum level achieved: was 56 before went on a vocation without internet.
    Current level: 48
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • PaffricPaffric Posts: 24
    edited 21.04.2012
    i agrre with KingWhiteFang
    Paffric @ WWW 1
    Member of IH Titns Shadow
    Currently level 47
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Sign In to comment.