Home English (UK) Players ask Players

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

About fair play

Wulf_Wulf_ Posts: 1
edited 24.11.2014 in Players ask Players
Taking rv from ruined player, ok or not? There seems to be different interpretations about the issue.
Post edited by Wulf_ on
Wulf_ @ skn 1
«1

Comments

  • neil33 (GB1)neil33 (GB1) Posts: 1,762
    edited 30.09.2014
    In GGS terms it is fine to take an RV from anyone active or not, alliance or alliance-less, HOWEVER if you were to follow the 'player' rules then you would:

    1) Message the player and/or the leader to see if they are still active, and if it is okay to take.
    2) Wait for reply, if no reply then you could launch or wait a little longer.

    Depends how much you want to follow the 'player' rules.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

    Proud member of Praetorians

    SO...I get conned out of rubies and support refuse to give them back. But when a ruby player does the same as me they get them back? This to me is point blank evidence that support and GGE don't give a fuck about us non ruby buyers...

    http://prntscr.com/93xafb

    Still think MeepMeep is one mad patty!
  • AndyGamer3 (GB1)AndyGamer3 (GB1) Posts: 107
    edited 08.10.2014
    I will only take it when/if the player is not in an alliance.

    If he/she is, I will message the leader and ask, 9 times out of 10 say yes anyway
    AndyGamer3 @ en 1
  • Felicia93Felicia93 Posts: 1
    edited 18.10.2014
    can I attack from an burning castle?
    Felicia9 @ skn 1
  • neil33 (GB1)neil33 (GB1) Posts: 1,762
    edited 18.10.2014
    Felicia93 wrote: »
    can I attack from an burning castle?

    Yes, you can.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

    Proud member of Praetorians

    SO...I get conned out of rubies and support refuse to give them back. But when a ruby player does the same as me they get them back? This to me is point blank evidence that support and GGE don't give a fuck about us non ruby buyers...

    http://prntscr.com/93xafb

    Still think MeepMeep is one mad patty!
  • NoblemanLee22NoblemanLee22 Posts: 3
    edited 19.10.2014
    I'm new at this game, and it is confusing. What I would like to know, is which castles you can attack, and which ones you can't? At times I get is why are you attacking me. Then we get a member in the alliance has attacked such alliance and be prepared for war. So, who can we attack, and who can't we attack. Also, on the seek enemies for honor, would this be an accurate thing to use? For future references, so I can take this back to Dark Leviathan.
    NoblemanLee22 @ usa 1
  • jeffereejefferee Posts: 112
    edited 19.10.2014
    I'm new at this game, and it is confusing. What I would like to know, is which castles you can attack, and which ones you can't? At times I get is why are you attacking me.
    Well you can attack anything you want, there are just consequences on occasion... :p

    The general expectation on USA1 seems to be that you only attack players within 10 levels, and don't attack burning castles (unless you're at war or looking to start one). A lot of people don't like having their outposts attacked, and most alliances view captures of outposts or resource villages as acts of war.

    If you're not doing any of the above, they're probably just complaining for the sake of complaining.
    Then we get a member in the alliance has attacked such alliance and be prepared for war. So, who can we attack, and who can't we attack.
    There's a feature in the diplomacy tab of the alliance settings that, when enabled, automatically declares war against anyone who attacks. This is possibly the worst feature of the game. Sounds like you ran into somebody who had it enabled.
    Also, on the seek enemies for honor, would this be an accurate thing to use?
    It's a fairly "dumb" tool in the sense that it makes no distinction between main castles and outposts, and it also doesn't take into account the player's alliance (there may be players and alliances who respond quite aggressively to attacks you may prefer to avoid).
    jefferee @ usa 1
    Deputy, deer hunters
    Level 70 Prince
  • Janbouli (INT2)Janbouli (INT2) Posts: 36
    edited 20.10.2014
    Thought it was common rule to NOT attack an already burning castle , one of my alliance mates got attacked while already burning and the attacker even sent pyro's along. So now his buildings have gone from 10 - 20 % damaged to some of them being 60% damaged.
    Janbouli @ WWW 2
  • Batten (GB1)Batten (GB1) GB1 Posts: 1,104
    edited 20.10.2014
    Some players now believe players are deliberately leaving fires to avoid being attacked. I'm of the view it just takes a while to put fires out. I have to admit to not checking if someone was on fire on a couple of occassions when doing multiple attacks so sometimes it's a mistake or oversight. In general most players don't attack castles on fire still though. I suspect players trying to maintain high glory or competing for something or who just don't care who they hit are more likely to conveniently ignore the rule when it suits them.
    Batten @ en 1
  • edited 27.10.2014
    As an alliance leader, I specify the rules that;
    1 You don't attack burning castles
    2 You only attack up to 10 levels below you and as many above as you dare.
    3 You don't attack OPs unless we are at war.
    I'm beginning to wonder whether to give a time, a couple of days, say, to put out the fires, but I've not decided yet.
    Shutterboozer @ en 1
  • neil33 (GB1)neil33 (GB1) Posts: 1,762
    edited 27.10.2014
    Batten2 wrote: »
    Some players now believe players are deliberately leaving fires to avoid being attacked. I'm of the view it just takes a while to put fires out. I have to admit to not checking if someone was on fire on a couple of occassions when doing multiple attacks so sometimes it's a mistake or oversight. In general most players don't attack castles on fire still though. I suspect players trying to maintain high glory or competing for something or who just don't care who they hit are more likely to conveniently ignore the rule when it suits them.

    Some players do deliberately leave fires in their castles, hoping to not get attacked. Although I would dispute the fact that many people don't. I, for one, wouldn't leave fires in my castle. Anyways, one or two fires isn't enough to stop an attack, they could be sabo fires. I have heard of people asking friends to sab them so they don't get attacked, how sad is that?
    As an alliance leader, I specify the rules that;
    1 You don't attack burning castles
    2 You only attack up to 10 levels below you and as many above as you dare.
    3 You don't attack OPs unless we are at war.
    I'm beginning to wonder whether to give a time, a couple of days, say, to put out the fires, but I've not decided yet.

    I have never gotten why people don't agree with attacking ops? There are usually more troops there so consequently more glory. I would rather hit a main though, but if they had an op 20 clicks away, and main was 500 clicks away, I know which one I'd pick straight away, don't you?

    Time for fires, that is a varied thing. I don't agree with it as some buildings can take over 6 hours to repair, and it also depends on the severity of the damage.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

    Proud member of Praetorians

    SO...I get conned out of rubies and support refuse to give them back. But when a ruby player does the same as me they get them back? This to me is point blank evidence that support and GGE don't give a fuck about us non ruby buyers...

    http://prntscr.com/93xafb

    Still think MeepMeep is one mad patty!
  • Five VenomsFive Venoms Posts: 50
    edited 27.10.2014
    I have never gotten why people don't agree with attacking ops? There are usually more troops there so consequently more glory. I would rather hit a main though, but if they had an op 20 clicks away, and main was 500 clicks away, I know which one I'd pick straight away, don't you?

    Time for fires, that is a varied thing. I don't agree with it as some buildings can take over 6 hours to repair, and it also depends on the severity of the damage.[/QUOTE]

    For the bolded statement, I couldn't agree more. Not every alliance member has an op right next door so, why not attack it? If the goal of Empire is to hit the main only, then it would get boring and there would be no point in recruiting troops, or having defence/seige workshops etc. Imagine, you have an alliance that has 65 members which have 65 main castles. However, the potential is there for another 195 OPs to have a go at. I was on International 2 and the rule was DON'T attack OPs. I was thinking to myself, what on earth!!!!! So yes, hitting OPs is fair-game and fair-play, otherwise the game would be boring.
    R.I.P Dad...05/09/1938 - 02/11/2014. Love you forever!!!

    Proud Sergeant of Gondor, part of the Arda family.


    Level 8 Baronet
    Level 24 Grand Duke
    Level 10 Baron
    Level 10 Viscount
    Level 10 Count
    Level 11 Count Palatine
    Level 15 Marquis
    Level 21 Vice Duke
    Level 23 Duke

    Five Venoms @ en 1



    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • neil33 (GB1)neil33 (GB1) Posts: 1,762
    edited 27.10.2014
    I have never gotten why people don't agree with attacking ops? There are usually more troops there so consequently more glory. I would rather hit a main though, but if they had an op 20 clicks away, and main was 500 clicks away, I know which one I'd pick straight away, don't you?

    Time for fires, that is a varied thing. I don't agree with it as some buildings can take over 6 hours to repair, and it also depends on the severity of the damage.

    For the bolded statement, I couldn't agree more. Not every alliance member has an op right next door so, why not attack it? If the goal of Empire is to hit the main only, then it would get boring and there would be no point in recruiting troops, or having defence/seige workshops etc. Imagine, you have an alliance that has 65 members which have 65 main castles. However, the potential is there for another 195 OPs to have a go at. I was on International 2 and the rule was DON'T attack OPs. I was thinking to myself, what on earth!!!!! So yes, hitting OPs is fair-game and fair-play, otherwise the game would be boring.[/QUOTE]

    Yes, thank you. There is nothing wrong with it, maybe an attacking op, but then i's there to be hit. With just mains it would be boring, and then you'd get loads of mains with WT's etc and maxed out ruby buildings, and res ops. No fun what's so ever, knowing where you were going to be attacked.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

    Proud member of Praetorians

    SO...I get conned out of rubies and support refuse to give them back. But when a ruby player does the same as me they get them back? This to me is point blank evidence that support and GGE don't give a fuck about us non ruby buyers...

    http://prntscr.com/93xafb

    Still think MeepMeep is one mad patty!
  • millwall97 (GB1)millwall97 (GB1) GB1 Posts: 2,513
    edited 27.10.2014
    neil332 wrote: »
    For the bolded statement, I couldn't agree more. Not every alliance member has an op right next door so, why not attack it? If the goal of Empire is to hit the main only, then it would get boring and there would be no point in recruiting troops, or having defence/seige workshops etc. Imagine, you have an alliance that has 65 members which have 65 main castles. However, the potential is there for another 195 OPs to have a go at. I was on International 2 and the rule was DON'T attack OPs. I was thinking to myself, what on earth!!!!! So yes, hitting OPs is fair-game and fair-play, otherwise the game would be boring.

    Yes, thank you. There is nothing wrong with it, maybe an attacking op, but then i's there to be hit. With just mains it would be boring, and then you'd get loads of mains with WT's etc and maxed out ruby buildings, and res ops. No fun what's so ever, knowing where you were going to be attacked.[/QUOTE]
    well depends how you look at it, if someone was to hit an OP full of attackers, then I would say that is taking advantage of a situation and would call for war although that would just be my opinion :/
    millwall97 @ Somalia1

    tCp90gif

    Don't click: https://goo.gl/IC6U01
  • neil33 (GB1)neil33 (GB1) Posts: 1,762
    edited 27.10.2014
    millwall97 wrote: »
    Yes, thank you. There is nothing wrong with it, maybe an attacking op, but then i's there to be hit. With just mains it would be boring, and then you'd get loads of mains with WT's etc and maxed out ruby buildings, and res ops. No fun what's so ever, knowing where you were going to be attacked.
    well depends how you look at it, if someone was to hit an OP full of attackers, then I would say that is taking advantage of a situation and would call for war although that would just be my opinion :/[/QUOTE]

    Well, I'd love to hit an op full of attackers, but I have my attack place with 1k defenders anyway to cover the walls, and then support (if any) etc.

    Remember, this is a war game, and consequently you have to do anything to win lol.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

    Proud member of Praetorians

    SO...I get conned out of rubies and support refuse to give them back. But when a ruby player does the same as me they get them back? This to me is point blank evidence that support and GGE don't give a fuck about us non ruby buyers...

    http://prntscr.com/93xafb

    Still think MeepMeep is one mad patty!
  • Five VenomsFive Venoms Posts: 50
    edited 27.10.2014
    millwall97 wrote: »
    Yes, thank you. There is nothing wrong with it, maybe an attacking op, but then i's there to be hit. With just mains it would be boring, and then you'd get loads of mains with WT's etc and maxed out ruby buildings, and res ops. No fun what's so ever, knowing where you were going to be attacked.
    well depends how you look at it, if someone was to hit an OP full of attackers, then I would say that is taking advantage of a situation and would call for war although that would just be my opinion :/[/QUOTE]


    That is why we send our attackers out. And make sure our defenders are in place. :-)
    R.I.P Dad...05/09/1938 - 02/11/2014. Love you forever!!!

    Proud Sergeant of Gondor, part of the Arda family.


    Level 8 Baronet
    Level 24 Grand Duke
    Level 10 Baron
    Level 10 Viscount
    Level 10 Count
    Level 11 Count Palatine
    Level 15 Marquis
    Level 21 Vice Duke
    Level 23 Duke

    Five Venoms @ en 1



    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • millwall97 (GB1)millwall97 (GB1) GB1 Posts: 2,513
    edited 27.10.2014
    neil332 wrote: »
    well depends how you look at it, if someone was to hit an OP full of attackers, then I would say that is taking advantage of a situation and would call for war although that would just be my opinion :/

    Well, I'd love to hit an op full of attackers, but I have my attack place with 1k defenders anyway to cover the walls, and then support (if any) etc.

    Remember, this is a war game, and consequently you have to do anything to win lol.[/QUOTE]
    oh well the attackers outpost is usually full of level 4 guardhouses anyway so rarely happens lol
    millwall97 @ Somalia1

    tCp90gif

    Don't click: https://goo.gl/IC6U01
  • neil33 (GB1)neil33 (GB1) Posts: 1,762
    edited 27.10.2014
    millwall97 wrote: »
    Well, I'd love to hit an op full of attackers, but I have my attack place with 1k defenders anyway to cover the walls, and then support (if any) etc.

    Remember, this is a war game, and consequently you have to do anything to win lol.
    oh well the attackers outpost is usually full of level 4 guardhouses anyway so rarely happens lol[/QUOTE]

    Blind attack? 50% spy chance to just get cast details?
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

    Proud member of Praetorians

    SO...I get conned out of rubies and support refuse to give them back. But when a ruby player does the same as me they get them back? This to me is point blank evidence that support and GGE don't give a fuck about us non ruby buyers...

    http://prntscr.com/93xafb

    Still think MeepMeep is one mad patty!
  • Stoic (US1)Stoic (US1) Posts: 132
    edited 28.10.2014
    As an alliance leader, I specify the rules that;
    1 You don't attack burning castles
    2 You only attack up to 10 levels below you and as many above as you dare.
    3 You don't attack OPs unless we are at war.
    I'm beginning to wonder whether to give a time, a couple of days, say, to put out the fires, but I've not decided yet.

    So as a level 70, if a level 55 attacks me I should not retaliate? Seems silly. The 10 level rule is ok when it is lower levels, but 50+ should all be fair game for anyone. Not attacking OPs is the stupidest rule and yet i hear people say this all the time. Outposts can hold twice as many troops as a main castle, why would you even care if it gets attacked?
  • Deezus82Deezus82 Posts: 1
    edited 28.10.2014
    I have no idea...but people sure get touchy about their OPs. 20 days ago I attacked one merely for the points, and it turned into a huge hour long debate...I'm still trying to find these "fair play" rules he berated me on. I build up my armies at my OPs and Main as often as I can. I just had to ask our members in the alliance to stop attacking OPs to save our leader's sanity. I THOUGHT this was a game of strategy, but some of these rules make me feel like we're all getting a ribbon for participating...
    Deezus82 @ usa 1
  • AnthonieAKAnthonieAK Posts: 21
    edited 28.10.2014
    All the high guilds have a handelspost a extra castle for troops a kingdomhouse and they attack who they want when they want and you can do nothing about but GGC thinks on one thing only $$, so new players will not come old not ruby player will eventually go. And why is there only englisch forum and not a forum bij language
    AnthonieAK @ nl 1

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file