Mass Revenge

[DeletedUser5943]

Proposal: Allow guild members from other neighbours to attack a player if a member of the guild was attacked

Have you checked the forums for the same or similar idea: Yes.

Reason: More fun, extra cooperation between the guild, plus it will make players think twice before attacking a neighbour, even if is less developed when it can face up to 79 extra attacks from that guild.

Details: A third window in town screen where you can see what member of the guild was attacked.

Visual Aids: None.

Balance/Abuse Prevention:

LAST UPDATES:

1. Revenge attacks don't give you points, so arrangements for extra battles will be avoided.

2. Mass Revenge should be triggered only if the attacker plunder, if only battle for points, no.

 

[DeletedUser]

add a max 2 age difference ,so lets say a player from bronze age can only be attacked by players from BA,IA and EMA from that guild,and add like 2-3 days timer before they can attack again using revenge guild (on any player not just the ravanged one)
and maybe a 12 hour plunder instead of normal 24 hour

i like the idea but i can see how it can be abused
lets say those 80 player belong to 10-15 different neighborhoods they use mass revenge just for the pvp points and or for the gold/supply/goods

 

[DeletedUser]

Though I see the appeal in that idea, AloGarA makes a good point.

Just like people asking crossworld FPs now, they can be asking cross'hood attacks, so guilds have more ppl to attack.
If you have guildmembers from several neighbourhoods and they get attacked by their neighbours, the guild would have several extra players per guildmember to attack.

Quite unfair on several levels.

- L

 

[DeletedUser]

to stop all abuse of the pvp tower just do not give battle points for revenge attacks of a guild member.

 

[DeletedUser]

2 easy to abuse - just invite 10 lowest ranked players from different neighborhoods and receive 700 extra attacks for your guild. and what about ppl, for example attacking bronze age player with bronze age troops, even if they are maybe late middle age and in return get rushed by 70 colonial players in a row? think you have to arrange with your neighborhood, cause there are more ways to prevent from being attacked than revenge, or at least install a defense, making attacks more expansive, than stuff could be plundered.

 

[DeletedUser]

It has been said on other threads that attacks do not hurt the defender. If the defender learns how to produce goods and supplies when on line then even the plunder should not hurt him. So the idea sounds like: If you attack me, I'll sic my big brother on you. Which is rather childish, IMO.

 

[DeletedUser8813]

+1 ohhhh yes i like this idea..simply because i have had a small hood for months ,,(40 to 45 fluctuates as some become inactive and others become active again)..it would give me more people to attack and gain xp points

 

[DeletedUser]

True, you can plan your goods and supplies, but a full scale revenge won't have to plunder your goods or supplies... 40-50 four hours houses (and I'm thinking mansions and manors and plantation houses here) or eight hours houses, I think would make you think twice before you attack a member of a strong guild
(even 1 hour houses if you lose 50 is not that nice)

I would say, this quote sums up pretty much why this is not a good idea on two levels.

1- Promoting bullying/mass beating of an individual by a large crowd. That is simply wrong. We are not talking here about two guilds fighting it off or two teams of players battling. This very much reminds me of scenes in middle ages when a helpless prisoner would be carried through the streets being hit with sticks and stones by the crowd.
Calling it "revenge" doesn't make it morally right.

2- At the very core of this game is that the war aspect is not very strong. A large appeal to the game comes from the fact that relatively little damage and harm can be caused to an individual. (the 24h attack gap/ plundering once, etc are designed for that purpose). An important part of the game is the fact that not being in a guild doesn't make it impossible to progress in the game.
The idea goes very much against the above core values of the game and it will send the game in a very different direction which i'm quite sure it's not a welcome thought by the game designers and product managers

 

[DeletedUser8813]

Did you read everything I wrote or you just took that out of context?

The guild members of the player you attack can't attack you if you don't attack that neighbour in the first place... even more, if that neighbour is a "troublemaker" and attack you first, you can revenge against him, and his guild also can't mass attack. (work only if you "throw the first stone")

No one is "forcing" you to attack someone, so the "mass bully" you get only if you are a bully too... the thing you quote was just a response to GrossEyeEh, because I got the feeling from it's post that even you recive a "mass revenge" if you plan your production well it can't harm you a lot, so it won't be very effective to intimidate potential "invaders". (maybe I understand it wrong)


Again, didn't read everything...

I proposed (after It was suggested that this can be exploited) that this attacks won't give you points (are only to teach a bully a lesson, and maybe get some resources if you plunder) - exactly to prevent "friendly" mass revenge between allied guilds to gain extra points.

The whole point of this idea was to give much more importance if you are a part of a guild, as it is now, if you are a member placed 60-80 in the guild, and alone in one "hood", except some convenient trades, you don't really "feel" you are part of a great alliance... a bigger sense of security even if you are not that advanced.

And yes GrossEyeEh "If you attack me, I'll sic my big brother on you" sound childish...

so I prefere the more serious "If you broke my finger, we gonna rip your arm off" :p

you could not have been more wrong"i read everything"i like the idea because i attack everyone in my hood..if they go to their guild and get them to attack me i get so many more people to attack as i get the right of retaliation so a guild of 80 retaliate on my one attack..i get 80 more people to attack..attacking people dosent make you a bully ,you are just using a feature of the game

 

[DeletedUser]

1. 700 extra plunder options aren´t worth an abuse?

2. you compare apple and pie - what i was talking about was - there are ppl fighting in more than one pvp tower at a time. and some only use troops, the defender COULD defend. so an IA player attacking and BA player with BA troops, will be attacked by a lot of CA player not from his neighborhood by implementing your idea.

 

[DeletedUser7719]

Why does this sound like guild wars?
Btw, I would only like this if there the "bully" should be defined as a person who is at least two ages above the bullied

 

[DeletedUser]

so an IA player attacking and BA player with BA troops, will be attacked by a lot of CA player not from his neighborhood by implementing your idea.

This seems like a good point. Not every attack on a neighbor is "bullying", there are plenty of times when a Bronze Age player attacks another Bronze Age player because they are competing in the Bronze Age tournament. But if that second player was in a large guild, the first could get a beating for it. And even if you try to plan your production/collection well, 80 extra people having a chance to plunder you can be devastating.

 

[DeletedUser]

I don't like the idea.. And I don't even battle
1) Attacking is not bullying, but a fun aspect of the game (to a lot of people), a way to get points and expansions
2) Attacking doesn't harm anyone, you don't lose a thing from it

Now as for plundering.. I don't see it as bullying either really. It's a feature of the game, and perfectly avoidable, and only doable once a day so even if it does happen when you have an accident planning your productions, it shouldn't hurt that much. The attacker should get something for having to upkeep such a vast army after all.

Allowing this only if the attacker used higher age units: What if that person only wants to compete in the colonial tower and does not wish to build a full army of every age? It just doesn't sound fair to label them a bully and attack them in masses.. One should not forget that attacking is a large element of the game, an actual part of it. It's not someon abusing the system or bullying another person. It's just playing the game in their chosen way.

~Mutzena~

 

[DeletedUser]

I personally believe if this game is to be more LIFE like then it has to acknowledge that sometimes you can get a SINGLE player in a neighborhood who just spends their whole time attacking/plundering the neighbours over and over and over and over, so if Players like this are not stripped out of the game by the Moderators, then the other Players need a way to teach him a lesson. So it would not be difficult to put a LIMIT how often a player can attack the same neighbour? Or better still incorporate a Neighbourhood League table where everyone can see each player how many times they have attacked another player in a week, and the name of their victim and how many times each player has motivated/polished another player! That way at the end of each week One player gets a bonus for most polishes/motivations an one player is voted to have an ass whooping, not A/I but they have to pitch ALL their actual troops against 2 troops from each one of the victims who agree to see him punished. It will stop nasty little psychos (like the one have in my neighbourhood) from getting away with it for weeks and weeks of bulling and robbing ALL his neighbours.

 

[DeletedUser]

+1

My guild is currently struggling to find new targets as with every week the points difference between the highest and lowest member decreases, so doeas the circle of neighborhoods and available target tighten up on us.

 

[DeletedUser8813]

I personally believe if this game is to be more LIFE like then it has to acknowledge that sometimes you can get a SINGLE player in a neighborhood who just spends their whole time attacking/plundering the neighbours over and over and over and over, so if Players like this are not stripped out of the game by the Moderators, then the other Players need a way to teach him a lesson. So it would not be difficult to put a LIMIT how often a player can attack the same neighbour? Or better still incorporate a Neighbourhood League table where everyone can see each player how many times they have attacked another player in a week, and the name of their victim and how many times each player has motivated/polished another player! That way at the end of each week One player gets a bonus for most polishes/motivations an one player is voted to have an ass whooping, not A/I but they have to pitch ALL their actual troops against 2 troops from each one of the victims who agree to see him punished. It will stop nasty little psychos (like the one have in my neighbourhood) from getting away with it for weeks and weeks of bulling and robbing ALL his neighbours.

i am that player i attack everyone in my hood every day,as soon as the clock runs down i go bash them,and on the odd occasion i plunder them.
there is a limit in place already its 1 attack every 24 hours.
i want the player points and attacking is the best way to get them,nobody is hurt you dont lose your troops and if your production strategy is good i dont get to plunder them ,if that was my whim at that given time..
and a whipping is unlikely to bother me a great deal .
its not weeks and weeks of bullying it is weeks and weeks of a player playing the whole game not just a part of it,
you have to remember it is a building /population game that incorporates ,attack,plunder,polish.motivate,buy,trade..as a whole game.it is not anyone elses fault you decide to only play a little part of the game.me i plan to experience the game as a whole

 

[DeletedUser]

-1. This proposal has major balance/abuse issues.

1. It will allow the strongest guilds to ransack everything everywhere unchallenged. Because if anyone tries to retaliate he becomes a target for 80 strongest players.
2. Each retaliation gains you access to another fight, with potential of 80*80 fights.

 

[DeletedUser]

2. Each retaliation gains you access to another fight, with potential of 80*80 fights.

Quiet simply it allows guild to simply attack each other. I don't see where the 80*80 came out from. Since guild member limit is 80, so if every player is allowed to attack all players from the other guild it will eventually simply lead to a 80 VS 80 battle.

Now i love this even more!

+2

 

[DeletedUser6838]

80*80 fights simply means what you just said, each member attacks each members of the opposing guild and the opposing guild same way back, 1 player attacks a member of another guild, all members of that guild attack that player, first players guild members attack all the members of the other guild -> 80*80+1, so if all 80 members attack all 80 opposing guild members you get 80*80 fights, if the other guild does same you get eventually 2*80*80 .

But for the sake of staying on topic.

-1 from me, because guild wars are already on the way (i think).

 

[DeletedUser]

Ah thank you for explaining, it's just that the * sign usually stands for "multiply". So others may get confused.