Complaint about Plundering

[DeletedUser98465]

Hi,

Given we have lots of threads about plundering, how unfair it is, how the weak can't retaliate, how my gameplay is ruined, life is over, its a catastrophe and generally I'm really really upset and want to leave. I decided to create a thread about how great plundering is, how bearing down on those that can't (or won't) defend themselves gives great pleasure to the community of players that love the "feature".

So, I vote for more plundering, more frequently, with a greater ability to take more goods in the 24 hour period I even vote for a GB that auto plunders set targets so I don't have to be online when I need to. I would evern go as far to say, just have certain selected neighbors produce goods that when collected by them, automatically go to my store so it saves me the effort of clicking anything at all.

Oh, and thanks for all the goods, power points and occasional coin/supplies








Disclaimer: Of course this is very tongue in cheek, and shouldn't be taken offence of

 

[DeletedUser1081]

There's already a thread about the same thing, DD dear: http://forum.en.forgeofempires.com/showthread.php?27207-Plundering

 

[Andrew420]

They are never going to let people plunder more than they can now
Also they will not get rid of the "choice" to plunder
I remember reading something about a feature being added in the future
I think it was instead of taking goods you could damage building or it was both you could plunder and damage building
Either way they aren't getting rid of it

 

[DeletedUser98465]

*head-desk*

I love the smell or irony in the morning...

 

[DeletedUser96867]

I believe i saw someone at one point suggest that after a successful attack we should also be given the option to polivate for a chance at a bp drop instead of forced to plunder something for the chance at the bp. I can't argue with that logic.

 

[DeletedUser]

Plundering is the only way PvP players have to motivate people to actually putting up a defense. If there was no plunder, no one would ever put up a defense and so no one could make tons of points. Tongue in cheek or not, I fully agree with your post Double. Though I think you missed some points.

Players who don't have defenses equal to my age (regardless of the fact that the hood merged put people in LMA into my PE hood) should loose global rank points when I beat them. But I don't get the points. That would just be unfair. They just poof away into the ether. Players who don't plunder should not only loose the points they won but the defeated player now gets to plunder the attacker. And if the defeated player doesn't plunder the attacker, everyone in the hood gets notice that they get to plunder that player without attacking them (or plunder twice, if they already attacked the player). And, most importantly, a modification to the Auto plunder option. When I defeat a player I should get to click a building, if that building isn't available to plunder, at it's next collection (even if it is two days away) automatically gets plundered one second before the player could have collected it. This will work for motivated buildings, town halls, army barracks, even GBs (with the attack GBs obviously giving me the plundered player's attack boost for 24 hours after it's collection and things like the Light House of Alexandria giving me their supply boost for the day).

Sheesh people, the amount of damage a plunder can do is so tiny compared to a single days total collection in your city. Put up a defense, collect on time and don't whine at the people who attack you, and there goes 97% of the reasons you'll ever even get plundered!

 

[Estipar]

Well said

 

[eeyore]

Hi,

So, I vote for more plundering, more frequently, with a greater ability to take more goods in the 24 hour period I even vote for a GB that auto plunders set targets

Disclaimer: *** of course this is very tongue in cheek, and shouldn't be taken offence of

I vote AGAINST, as the attack / plunder cycle is "incestuous" and self-proliferating. You get the massive few top scorers and the rest have to suffer. My vote is to reduce plundering. Also: if not in the same age / era, attack/plunder should be made impossible. and neighbourhoods should be thoroughly redesigned by points : e.g. 0-100,000 points, 100,001-200,000, 200,001- and so forth. With automatic progression (so if your points go above, you automatically move to the next neighbourhood. That way, the top is not static and moves on / away. Result: it's not always the same four or five top people terrorising the bottom end of the 'hood.

 

[DeletedUser96901]

I vote AGAINST, as the attack / plunder cycle is "incestuous" and self-proliferating. You get the massive few top scorers and the rest have to suffer. My vote is to reduce plundering. Also: if not in the same age / era, attack/plunder should be made impossible. and neighbourhoods should be thoroughly redesigned by points : e.g. 0-100,000 points, 100,001-200,000, 200,001- and so forth. With automatic progression (so if your points go above, you automatically move to the next neighbourhood. That way, the top is not static and moves on / away. Result: it's not always the same four or five top people terrorising the bottom end of the 'hood.

points are nonsense
if you divide: then by research and GB levels

because a player with 200.000 can be "better" than someone with 1.000.000 points
(better in this case: more advanced in research and higher great buildings)

 

[DeletedUser15432]

Well eeyore, you appear to be mixing your metaphores here as plundering can not be incestuous, furthermore, as Test Ament says, neighbourhoods are governed by tech tree advancement and the level of the great buildings that a player might have in their city. You might have a the top end of a neighbourhood a player with 1 million plus points but their tech tree development might be the same as a player with a lot less points accumulated, they might have decided to invest in getting their great buildings to a certain level and slowed down on the tech tree whereas another player might decide to race through the tech tree at a mush faster rate

The game is down to individual playing styles and has the best possible mix of all items

 

[DeletedUser1094]

I normally tend to stay away from these plundering-discussions...but this one caught my attention.

Well done DoubleDecker, an OP that makes me smile deserves a +rep.

...but I still refuse to discuss the plundering. Well...almost...

It's a part of the Game-play...and has always been a part of the Game-play. Whether you like it or not, you know it's a feature, shortly after you start the game. It is up to you, to deside... "Can/will I play this game with this feature?" ?

The extra question-mark is the end of my part of the discussion...
...and stands for your answer to the question.

Disclaimer : "You" = everybody, who questions the existence of the plundering option.

 

[DeletedUser]

I like the plunder feature and anyone who doesn't clearly only feels that way because they are rubbish at the game. Be active, defend and collect on time and problem solved.

I do feel that the whole plunder system is a bit 1 dimentional though, I would encorage a scaling system in the returns.

For example, if you plunder someone the same age as you = as it is now.
Plunder someone 1 age above you, get 10% bonus on top of whatever you plunder
2 ages above you = 30%
3 ages above you = 60%
4 ages above you = 100%

And likewise the other way,
1 age below you get 10% less
2 ages below you get 30% less etc.

This would encorage people to take on harder targets rather than just picking on the bottom end of the neighbourhood all the time and swiping goods from noobies. Although the key feature of this idea is that you still CAN attack and plunder anyone you want, rather than the can/cant attitude of most suggestions on the matter.

 

[DeletedUser1081]

I like the plunder feature and anyone who doesn't clearly only feels that way because they are rubbish at the game.

Being ranked 60 out of 49,971 in my world I am clearly rubbish at this game, but I don't plunder and I don't like it that the game lets people pick on lower-ranked players. So handicaps when you attack neighbours in lower eras would be a very good step forward. How about proposing it in the idea section? Or would your own logic mean you must be rubbish at this game if you suggest it, and then that anyone who gives it a +1 must be rubbish too?

 

[DeletedUser]

Being ranked 60 out of 49,971 in my world I am clearly rubbish at this game, but I don't plunder and I don't like it that the game lets people pick on lower-ranked players. So handicaps when you attack neighbours in lower eras would be a very good step forward. How about proposing it in the idea section? Or would your own logic mean you must be rubbish at this game if you suggest it, and then that anyone who gives it a +1 must be rubbish too?

Rank has nothing to do with it. I am rank 27 out of 47,446 on Korch, all that means is I have some time on my hands, not really anything to do with skill.

My point is that being good at a game or otherwise, is decided on how you interact with all of the features and deal with issues in a manner allowed by the game mechanics. If something doesn't suit you, you can't just ignore it. It's part of the game. It's like saying I don't like collecting supplies I only like collecting coins, it's not fair that the game doesn't let me progress in the way I want to play. That's just not how it works. If you choose not to PvP then that's up to you, but if others do choose to then that's not up to you, that's up to them!

Another point, continuing, is that your logic is absolutely nonsensical. If you actually read the words that I wrote, what you'll find is that I said people who want a particular feature removed because they don't like it is basically a sign that they are not skilled at managing all aspects of the game. Proposing or supporting an idea that would *improve* this feature and make the entire PvP experience both fairer and more challenging is absolutely not the same as begging for it to be removed.

Now sit down before you fall and hurt yourself.

 

[DeletedUser1081]

LoL - bravissimo! Now how about heading over to the Ideas Section and proposing your improvement? It's a good one, and you'll have my most sincere +1 when you do.

 

[DeletedUser]

LoL - bravissimo! Now how about heading over to the Ideas Section and proposing your improvement? It's a good one, and you'll have my most sincere +1 when you do.

There you go
http://forum.en.forgeofempires.com/...A-solution-to-the-plundering-dilemma&p=159110

 

[eeyore]

The plundering is STUPID!! And the GAME MAKERS should take heed!

The world of "Tomorrow" is hardly out and there are attacking with fully fledged troops and cities that only hackers or game moderators can achieve. "dome" in the world of "Arvahal" is one example.
I really don't care what arguments for or against there are. It used to be: if you conquer the PvP tower you can attack those players from your age.
Now it's a "free for all", designed by rather tedious game makers that have turned a trading game into a war game.

It is NOT fun.

 

[eeyore]

I never was offered a "feature" to choose when I joined 3 years ago. I joined peacefully and as a trader.

 

[DeletedUser99588]

I never was offered a "feature" to choose when I joined 3 years ago. I joined peacefully and as a trader.

As every trader knows you need to lock up your goods to stop them being taken. So lock them up in your town hall as quickly as possible and all will be fine.

 

[DeletedUser96901]

The world of "Tomorrow" is hardly out and there are attacking with fully fledged troops and cities that only hackers or game moderators can achieve.

actually everyone can attack at the first day with Tomorrow units

enough FP from inventory
goods from repeating quests
and troops from Alcatraz, a Champions Retreat with Renovation Kit is also nice

everyone who knows how the game works can do it :p

Now it's a "free for all"

but it is "pay to win" :p
or at least: pay to be faster than other