OUTPOSTS ISSUE

Pisky (GB1) · 18.06.2021

On a mobile at mo. The release i read was from Stillfront when they announced the taking over of GGE. It was who went where and numbers. After that i saw no point in reading GGE as Stillfront are the owners and decision makers. IT was the same in recent news about shares, it came from Stillfront, not Gge. Unless of course you know better than Stillfront. Interesting concept.

Daisho · 18.06.2021

If you mean this press release: https://www.stillfront.com/en/stillfront-group-ab-stillfront-completes-the-acquisition-of-goodgame-studios/ then it doesn't say anything of what you said either, yes they took ownership and own the shares, but they don't control the exact content/gameplay that goes into the game. I never said I knew better than Stillfront, not sure where you got that from, I am just simply stating the facts regarding this topic.

Daisho · 18.06.2021

Even in this one, https://www.stillfront.com/en/stillfront-group-ab-stillfront-acquires-goodgame-studios/

They take over, but don't directly influence the content/gameplay. It mentions the increase of monetization, but that isn't content/gameplay, GGS would make the decisions on how they would increase the monetization, Stillfront just tell them to do it.

Pisky (GB1) · 18.06.2021

The topic is over the exploitation of Ops, and should rules be brought in to contol them. I have sent into support about it, so if any others are concerned send to support.

Daisho · 18.06.2021

Indeed it is, there are rules in place, and like you said, report it and it will be investigated. I know its not ideal but it is what it is unfortunately

tequila101 (INT1) · 18.06.2021

domitsu (GB1) said:

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

yes clearing would be difficult if players or the alliance think that attacking it after the flag has landed would be a better option than defending the capture. most often that is the general notion that it's a good way to generate glory points and deplete the opposing enemies of their own defenders. however, if an alliance can't break it, they have obviously under estimated their enemy. this is one key points in winning war: know your enemy.

i have seen many who are far successful in defending their captures. why, 1- the castellan is usually weak. 2 - they can open gates on OP and stack it with loads of defenders.

so the question is, why has the flag landed and why players wait for defenders to be stacked?

and thereafter when the alliance fail, they go run to GGE and lodge complain? how does one player's mistake become GGE's responsibility? i bet, if the alliance succeeds, they will be all happy and no one will complain about an account being created to capture an OP. i bet again, they would instead put a mockery on the enemy's failed capture.

i agree with the points raised about GGE less likelihood of changing the mechanism just because of one alliance has failed miserably. Overall, GGE will likely keep the current mechanics as this will be healthy on their pocket.

yes, it can be subject to exploitation, but hey, during hard times, clever people come out and find ways to work around their predicament.

tequila101 (INT1) · 18.06.2021

Pisky (GB1) said:

The topic is over the exploitation of Ops, and should rules be brought in to contol them. I have sent into support about it, so if any others are concerned send to support.

changing the rules on OPs capture will impact the game's over all concept of strategy game. The green map will turn like the kingdoms --- barren.

one thing i see GGE could do with change is to prolong the capture time. this will make more monies to GGE and make it more expensive to capture an OP. imagine the amount of defenders and attackers that will go down the drain to break a developed OP.

Pisky (GB1) · 18.06.2021

I could never understand GGE's plans for OP's, and they way they did it, as it meant they lost one one of the sources of revenue available from new starters , and also mke a mockery of one of their attempts at limiting within the game.

REVENUE.

By allowing the capture of developed Ops, and the passing on to new players, GGE lost the the revenue that would have been generated by those new players on upgrading their ops as they became established. As the use and upgrades of ops progressed as the game levelled up, even more revenue was lost to GGE as basically players gained ownership of maxed/developed ops, without spending a penny in real money, or buying a ruby.

Now if we look at one of GGE's earlier attempt to slow the game down, by reducing time skips, feathers etc, it failed. GGE at that time said that the speed was bad for the game, similar to what they are saying now, but the same as now they are going about it the wrong way.They tried to slow down, buildin g and leveling up, but again left one of the biggest exploites used by Multiaccounters, alone. The capping/stealing of Ops. The exploit being if that player had the means to create MultiAccounts, then as far as GGE were concerned they were spending revenue, so fell outside of the catchment area, for slowing down. I honestly think that GGE never anticipated the numbers of Multiaccounts being created to interfere in the gameplay as much as it has. They never anticipated alliances being created full of shell accounts, the storing and hoarding of assets stripped from normal players and wars being held to ransome and sold against GGE's T&C, even the Multiaccounts/shells doing the stealing are against the T&C, but no where is enough being done by GGE to stem it.

I think that GGE/Stillfront have to address this exploit as it is stealing, and much of it being done done by accounts that need to be looked into as whether they are legal or not. I always believed that any gaming company would always safeguard a players investment/spending in their game, as well as the time spent upgrading, and playing the game. To remove that protection, then Stillfront may as well make main castles stealable, and how long would the game last then.

They put protection in place to protect RV's which were in no way as valuable as players modern Op's, now is the time to protect those Ops, and stop the exploitation by, and creation of Multiaccounts accounts and shells. If you want to remove something illegal from the game, such as multi's/shells, then you remove the need for their creation, even if its done one thing at a time.

PROTECT OPS, GET RID OF MULTI'S AND SHELLS.

domitsu (GB1) · 18.06.2021

tequila101 (INT1) said:

yes clearing would be difficult if players or the alliance think that attacking it after the flag has landed would be a better option than defending the capture. most often that is the general notion that it's a good way to generate glory points and deplete the opposing enemies of their own defenders. however, if an alliance can't break it, they have obviously under estimated their enemy. this is one key points in winning war: know your enemy.

i have seen many who are far successful in defending their captures. why, 1- the castellan is usually weak. 2 - they can open gates on OP and stack it with loads of defenders.

so the question is, why has the flag landed and why players wait for defenders to be stacked?

Because serious captures in this game involving creating a new alt account, moving it next door, levelling it to 12, and having big players send a mass hit of 20 odd 5k armies for 4am with the flag landing by the level 12 just after the mass hits. Then the alliance stack defends it, and because of the level of the flag, attackers can only send tiny armies to clear the defenders out, even with 11 waves.

These are way harder to prevent than they look.

LyooN (RO1) · 18.06.2021

poverty will hit you, you will not receive any money in your accounts you will go bankrupt because you earned illegal money on the backs of all those who put money in your accounts I will make criminal complaints and complaints to consumer protection for the refund and because you are making fun of us only money you want you will not receive any money you will receive the closing and suspension of this game.

tequila101 (INT1) · 18.06.2021

i still could not fully comprehend and understand how a fully developed OP can be captured.
surely there would be so much time to see the horn warning. even if it's a next door. like 2hrs or so.
big alliances don't usually have dead zones for more than an hour. unless they miss to account for this alliance strategy.
a fully developed OP can easily hold 20k defenders. question, where were the player's own defenders???
even if enemy mass attack an OP with an intent to clean defenders, they surely can easily surmise enemy's intent.
the player could have opened gate on the OP.
i think players who lost fully developed OP is just plain noob or the alliance itself is.
when players depend on alliance's 'super' players to knock down a capture and underestimating the enemy's is also a weakness.
they can't blame game mechanics for their own mishap.
they were just simply got outsmarted by the enemy. plain and simple.
and granted a low level acct was used, the alliance has more than enough time to level it up to a point that it would make more damage and clean supports. clearly, this was not taken into consideration. or simply, the player and the alliance didn't have much resources to break a capture. so, why blame the game mechanics?

tequila101 (INT1) · 18.06.2021

tequila101 (INT1) said:

i still could not fully comprehend and understand how a fully developed OP can be captured.
surely there would be so much time to see the horn warning. even if it's a next door. like 2hrs or so.
big alliances don't usually have dead zones for more than an hour. unless they miss to account for this alliance strategy.
a fully developed OP can easily hold 20k defenders. question, where were the player's own defenders???
even if enemy mass attack an OP with an intent to clean defenders, they surely can easily surmise enemy's intent.
the player could have opened gate on the OP.
i think players who lost fully developed OP is just plain noob or the alliance itself is.
when players depend on alliance's 'super' players to knock down a capture and underestimating the enemy's is also a weakness.
they can't blame game mechanics for their own mishap.
they were just simply got outsmarted by the enemy. plain and simple.
and granted a low level acct was used, the alliance has more than enough time to level it up to a point that it would make more damage and clean supports. clearly, this was not taken into consideration. or simply, the player and the alliance didn't have much resources to break a capture. so, why blame the game mechanics?

if a player misses his own defenders because he supports others, why blame the game mechanics? surely the player could have pulled back his defenders, right? it really doesn't make sense to go after the game mechanics when the fault is on the alliance itself and the player himself.

Pisky (GB1) · 18.06.2021

Don't think you are understanding, maybe one of the biggies on your server should show you, so you can see it in action.

Its an exploit that while quite small originally, is now a major one because of how the game has developed, and the ops have become a major part of whats become an expensive game, and they are major assetts in that game, that should be protected by the developers, and the exploit closed. It should also be done because of the impact that it would have in combating the other illegal issue that goes hand in hand with it, which is the creation of multiaccounts and shells. Which are illegal, and should be stopped by Stillfront.

tequila101 (INT1) · 18.06.2021

Pisky (GB1) said:

Don't think you are understanding, maybe one of the biggies on your server should show you, so you can see it in action.

Its an exploit that while quite small originally, is now a major one because of how the game has developed, and the ops have become a major part of whats become an expensive game, and they are major assetts in that game, that should be protected by the developers, and the exploit closed. It should also be done because of the impact that it would have in combating the other illegal issue that goes hand in hand with it, which is the creation of multiaccounts and shells. Which are illegal, and should be stopped by Stillfront.

changing how OPs game mechanics will turn this game into farmville. players might as well quit good game empire and jump to farmville game. GGE has that game platform.

domitsu (GB1) · 18.06.2021

tequila101 (INT1) said:

and granted a low level acct was used, the alliance has more than enough time to level it up to a point that it would make more damage and clean supports. clearly, this was not taken into consideration. or simply, the player and the alliance didn't have much resources to break a capture. so, why blame the game mechanics?

You misunderstand here. You don't want to level it up. The capture is from the low level account. When trying to clean supports, your troops to send are limited to the level of the player who put the flag in. If it's a level 12, even your LL 800 players can only send very small armies against it, yet the level 12 can make use of fully developed wall capacities.

2 hours might well sound like a lot, but a lot of alliances don't have 24/7 coverage with serious defence numbers. 20k defenders is absolutely nothing against a serious cleaning attack. The player can't open gates if he goes to bed and the horns don't show up for another 4-5 hours. By the time he wakes up in the morning, there's already a flag there with 200k or more defenders in.

Pisky (GB1) · 18.06.2021

Interested as to why you think that. I would have thought most players would want to protect their investment in the game from theft, especially valuable ones.

The only ones I would have thought that would be concerned would be the ones that would lose the reasons for making Multi's and shell accounts, or the ones that would never spend the time or money ungrading their own Op's, but would rather steal someone elses hard work and assets and then crow about it on the forum.

The developers could easily bring in alt options, such as extra cappable Op types, or resource camps, the options could be numerous, and open up an as yet unused avenue to the game. They could even do as they did with RV's and split them into cappable and non cappable, there are many options that would probably be acceptable, and close the current exploit.

tequila101 (INT1) · 18.06.2021

Pisky (GB1) said:

Interested as to why you think that. I would have thought most players would want to protect their investment in the game from theft, especially valuable ones.
The only ones I would have thought that would be concerned would be the ones that would lose the reasons for making Multi's and shell accounts, or the ones that would never spend the time or money ungrading their own Op's, but would rather steal someone elses hard work and assets and then crow about it on the forum.
The developers could easily bring in alt options, such as extra cappable Op types, or resource camps, the options could be numerous, and open up an as yet unused avenue to the game. They could even do as they did with RV's and split them into cappable and non cappable, there are many options that would probably be acceptable, and close the current exploit.

you protect your investment by not letting it dried of your own defenders. if you send out all your defenders to others, there is no one to blame but yourself. it's your investment. you built it. you protect it.

tequila101 (INT1) · 18.06.2021

domitsu (GB1) said:

tequila101 (INT1) said:

and granted a low level acct was used, the alliance has more than enough time to level it up to a point that it would make more damage and clean supports. clearly, this was not taken into consideration. or simply, the player and the alliance didn't have much resources to break a capture. so, why blame the game mechanics?

You misunderstand here. You don't want to level it up. The capture is from the low level account. When trying to clean supports, your troops to send are limited to the level of the player who put the flag in. If it's a level 12, even your LL 800 players can only send very small armies against it, yet the level 12 can make use of fully developed wall capacities.

2 hours might well sound like a lot, but a lot of alliances don't have 24/7 coverage with serious defence numbers. 20k defenders is absolutely nothing against a serious cleaning attack. The player can't open gates if he goes to bed and the horns don't show up for another 4-5 hours. By the time he wakes up in the morning, there's already a flag there with 200k or more defenders in.

if alliance don't have players to fill in the dead zones, then there is a failure of leadership already. when you lead a pack, you would have considered making sure that dead zones are accounted particularly during war games. unless the leader of the pack thinks he is playing on farmville.

Pisky (GB1) · 18.06.2021

Sorry but to me you don't seem to really know what your talking about, and keep blaming an alliance as it being their problem.

What you have to remember is, that there is always a bigger fish in the pond that you. No matter what you think you can defend against there willalways be someone that can defeat you. If you don't realise that then you have some massive defeats coming, your way

I can see some high level players from some top alliances reading your replies and and trying to work out if you are trying to insult them, or just don't know the game. I think a lot of it is the second, as you seem to have never experienced many if any concentrated attacks directed at you. I can asure you that it would change your mind, once it happens. Once you see trains of 11 wave attackers heading your way, designed to clear your defences and troops, and any that your alliance can send I know you will realise the sillyness of your answers. They will also work out when you are offline, and during that time you will get the same treatment, eventually even your alliance won't be able to support you, and you find yourself alone, or go online to find it all done and dusted.

If you still think it won't, can't happen to you, then I think that maybe will show you the flaw in your reasoning, and also that you shouldn't be casting assumptions against players you have stolen OP's from.

tequila101 (INT1) · 18.06.2021

when i lost my OP, i did tried to recapture it. on several occasions, they would defend my capture with small defenders or they would break it within 10mins after my capture landed. but you know there is one episode that stood out and made me realize that their alliance is living up to their alliance description: "we never sleep". it is that one capture where they broke my flag within seconds of me landing my flag. i could not imagine how they could do it. ask me if it's the same player from the same alliance, nope, it is another player from a different alliance, their wing ally who broke my capture within seconds gap.

OUTPOSTS ISSUE

Comments

Leave a Comment