• Dear forum reader,
    To actively participate in our forum discussions or to start your own threads, in addition to your game account, you need a forum account. You can     REGISTER HERE!
    Please ensure a translation into English is provided if your post is not in English and to respect your fellow players when posting.
  • We are looking for you!
    Always wanted to join our Support or Forum Team? We are looking for enthusiastic moderators!
    Take a look at our recruitment page for more information and how you can apply:
    Apply
  • Forum Contests

    Won't you join us for out latest contest?
    You can check out the newest one here.

Neighborhood battles

Status
Not open for further replies.

DeletedUser9133

As you all know, some players constantly attack other cities. Many of these players have high point totals and attack and defense values. These players are very hard to take revenge against. Many are almost unbeatable and very hard to defend your cities against, however, if you happen to be lucky enough to have chosen the right army to defend your city, he or she will lose the battle. I think that if you successfully defend your city and the attacking player loses the battle, you should be able to plunder him or her just like they are able to plunder you if they win. In short, the winning army, regardless of being the attacker or defender, should be able to plunder the loser. This may make some of the bullies think twice before attacking you. Those are just my thoughts to help improve the game.
 
Cursedveggie

Cursedveggie

Legend
If I come round your house to steal the TV but fail to break in what makes you think my door is wide open for you to pop in and take what you want?
 

DeletedUser113125

It’s an interesting idea. However weaker players would be put off trying to attack others in fear of being raided. Also attacking does not automatically mean plundering. If I attack for HC with no intention of plundering, should my city be at risk?
 

DeletedUser9133

Selene the Savior 413 said:
It’s an interesting idea. However weaker players would be put off trying to attack others in fear of being raided. Also attacking does not automatically mean plundering. If I attack for HC with no intention of plundering, should my city be at risk?
Click to expand...
Hi Selena,
I myself do not plunder unless someone plunders me. I have been plundered and tried to seek revenge but could not beat the army. Some of these players are so high in attack and defense that they are almost impossible to beat but these players have attacked me and lost because I happened to have the correct army for defense. You are right that if you attack with no intention of plundering, then no your city should not be at risk. I guess this was not such a good idea but it was meant for the bullies who can be relentless. I feel sorry for the little guys who these high ranked players take advantage of. I have been playing this game now everyday for 7 years and I don't come anywhere near the ranking of the higher players. This system needs to be balanced out somehow. FOE has lost many a player due to constant plundering. I myself had 4 cities and shut down 2 of them due to plundering. I know it is just a game but I don't like being plundered. Balancing neighborhoods more equally based on point totals might be what is needed.
 

DeletedUser9133

Cursedveggie said:
If I come round your house to steal the TV but fail to break in what makes you think my door is wide open for you to pop in and take what you want?
Click to expand...
If you came to my house and failed to break in, I wouldn't know who you were so how could I come to your house but I would hope you succeeded in breaking in. Then either my dog would maul you or if I happened to be home at the time, I would blow your head off. Get real Cursed, you are comparing real life situations with a game. Maybe it was not such a good idea but don't compare it with breaking into my house.
 

DeletedUser9133

Agent327 said:
What if the attacker retreats?
Click to expand...
Ok, this idea has plenty of bugs just like FOE and maybe it is not such a good idea but something needs to be done about balancing neighborhoods. The top player in a neighborhood might have 140 million points while the lowest player might have 20 million. That's quite a difference and a real disadvantage for the lower players. I have been playing FOE everyday for 7 years and I don't even come close to these high ranked players. A lot of these lower players quit the game because of constant plundering. I myself used to have 4 cities but shut down 2 of them for that reason. Thanks for listening!!!
 
Cursedveggie

Cursedveggie

Legend
You talk about ranking points a lot. Can I ask what your score is after playing for 7 years?

Have an Iron age friend who is ranked higher than my OF city, doesn't mean he could beat my defence given the chance
 

DeletedUser113125

oipsac said:
Hi Selena,
I myself do not plunder unless someone plunders me. I have been plundered and tried to seek revenge but could not beat the army. Some of these players are so high in attack and defense that they are almost impossible to beat but these players have attacked me and lost because I happened to have the correct army for defense. You are right that if you attack with no intention of plundering, then no your city should not be at risk. I guess this was not such a good idea but it was meant for the bullies who can be relentless. I feel sorry for the little guys who these high ranked players take advantage of. I have been playing this game now everyday for 7 years and I don't come anywhere near the ranking of the higher players. This system needs to be balanced out somehow. FOE has lost many a player due to constant plundering. I myself had 4 cities and shut down 2 of them due to plundering. I know it is just a game but I don't like being plundered. Balancing neighborhoods more equally based on point totals might be what is needed.
Click to expand...
I agree that frequent plundering is depressing and I don’t know a solution. I tried to come up with ideas before but none were practical.
 
Agent327

Agent327

Overlord
oipsac said:
Ok, this idea has plenty of bugs just like FOE and maybe it is not such a good idea but something needs to be done about balancing neighborhoods. The top player in a neighborhood might have 140 million points while the lowest player might have 20 million. That's quite a difference and a real disadvantage for the lower players. I have been playing FOE everyday for 7 years and I don't even come close to these high ranked players. A lot of these lower players quit the game because of constant plundering. I myself used to have 4 cities but shut down 2 of them for that reason. Thanks for listening!!!
Click to expand...

This isn't an idea. It is nothing more than a thought that came up. You did not even bother to make an idea out of it, nor did you do any reseearch. Ranking points do not say anything about a players strength. You want to balance a system that you do not know the working of.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top