You are not logged in.

Game 10:1 attack rule

  • 1
  • 2

g00076695

Trainee

  • "g00076695" started this thread

Posts: 73

  • Send private message

1

Sunday, April 24th 2011, 3:48pm

10:1 attack rule

the 10:1 attack rule is stupid

once the 60 days attack protection deadline has passed, all players should be allowed to be attacked despite size. 60 days is plenty of time to get a defence in place, and larger players are unlikely to target a smaller player unless provoked to do so. besides, we all start in the same radius on the map, so we all have the same advantage when starting

besides,i thought the moral bonus was the prevention mechanism put in place to prevent small players getting rimmed.


i suggest that if a player attacks a player above the 10:1, they should lose that attack protection as they are obviously big/experienced enough to play if they are targeting bigger players. As the saying goes - "You don't give it if you cant take it".


this rule also prevents eliminating enemies. one of the enticements this game always had was the fact that you could eliminate an opponent and force them to restart from scratch. this made the game very interesting as a lot of online games don't have this attraction, but since this dimension has been removed from the game, it no longer has the same appeal to players.

The current situation means that after just capturing a very few settlements, a successful player who has managed to capture a few settlements then finds themselves in a situation where they must travel longer distances across enemy settlements they cant attack. unless they are turtles and capture abandoned settlements which they build up, they risk incoming attacks from several smaller enemies on their doorsteps if they launch at a larger player a longer distance away.

this leads to a stalemate and is one of the contributing factors to the demise of the game. eliminating players is a feature players like


the 10:1 rule needs to be removed. that ratio is unrealistic and should be removed. the moral bonus is in place for that purpose

Saruman

Beginner

Posts: 2

  • Send private message

2

Sunday, April 24th 2011, 9:33pm

I have to agree with this, it is so annoying when you work on killing an enemy take 2 of his setts the suddenly you cant attack him any more. W7 has been going on long enough it should not be a beginners world.

Hadriano

Intermediate

Posts: 525

  • Send private message

3

Sunday, April 24th 2011, 10:51pm

read the w7 rules

w7 rules
W3 LOR/~CH~/SN/[BR]/~MD~ Originally Hadriano
W6 ~LT~/~DL~/~VvV~/I.B
W7 SN/EVIL
W8 RONIN/SISU/RONIN
W9 T-SQUAD/WR Briefly Anu
W10 TI/I.B

g00076695

Trainee

  • "g00076695" started this thread

Posts: 73

  • Send private message

4

Monday, April 25th 2011, 12:43am

that 10:1 rule is having adverse consequences that will eventually suicide this world.

as players grow they can only capture abandoned settlements because of this rule. capturing active settlements means travelling a lot further. because they can only capture abandoned settlements, there will be fewer abandoned settlements for them to farm. this means more competition for resources and poorer yields from raids. this forces more long distance raids to make it worth while. if you have to send loads of raids long distances to collect very low yields, after a while it will not be worth while sending any. this leads to boredom, and more and more players will quit


it is already beginning to happen. raids are already less productive, and a lot of players are quitting

either some drastic changes are made soon, otherwise it will end soon

Hadriano

Intermediate

Posts: 525

  • Send private message

5

Monday, April 25th 2011, 1:11am

stop moaning your not even affected that much by it your small really.
try my seat i have reason to moan but do you see me moaning no.
its no biggy if you cant coop with it quit
W3 LOR/~CH~/SN/[BR]/~MD~ Originally Hadriano
W6 ~LT~/~DL~/~VvV~/I.B
W7 SN/EVIL
W8 RONIN/SISU/RONIN
W9 T-SQUAD/WR Briefly Anu
W10 TI/I.B

Hathor

Intermediate

Posts: 227

  • Send private message

6

Monday, April 25th 2011, 1:03pm

Hmmm on the one hand you say large players are unlikely to target small players unless provoked and on the other you complain that you can't. So ... which is it? Certainly there ARE players who would rather target someone small, and preferably isolated, despite the morale factor, than take on someone their own size.

It just need some thinking about and also perhaps for alliances to ensure that they have some smaller players in their ranks. In any event it's a two way street, if you come under massive attack you also will benefit from regained protection and your target options increase. Besides the protection IS lost if you attack a much bigger player.

My only issue with it is that it shouldn't apply to inactive players so perhaps if the protection is lost if you haven't logged in for a week or something.
Playing as Kerowyn -

Gareeth

Game Administrator

Posts: 541

Location: Canada

  • Send private message

7

Sunday, May 1st 2011, 9:07pm

No player has ever grown so large that they are ten times bigger than everyone else. It just doesn't happen. Is a player with hundred settlements taking on one with 1 really a fair fight? Is that the sort of warrior you even want to be?

Hadriano

Intermediate

Posts: 525

  • Send private message

8

Monday, May 2nd 2011, 12:31am

Quoted from "Gareeth"

No player has ever grown so large that they are ten times bigger than everyone else. It just doesn't happen. Is a player with hundred settlements taking on one with 1 really a fair fight? Is that the sort of warrior you even want to be?

it trying to make the game harder enjoy it :-P
W3 LOR/~CH~/SN/[BR]/~MD~ Originally Hadriano
W6 ~LT~/~DL~/~VvV~/I.B
W7 SN/EVIL
W8 RONIN/SISU/RONIN
W9 T-SQUAD/WR Briefly Anu
W10 TI/I.B

Ronin Warrior

Intermediate

Posts: 299

  • Send private message

9

Tuesday, November 1st 2011, 10:50pm

I was going to make a new thread about this, but i guess i have to reply to the old thread already open.

10:1 is stupid

i have so many inactive setts around me, but because it takes GF 2 months (it seems) to delete a player im just sitting in my area with nowhere to grow. unless stated earlier i move further an further away. maybe if i was still online 22 hours out of the 24 hour day i could study every players start time an predict when he comes out of 10:1. since i cant the other players that are on 22 hrs day take the sett before i can even log in. it has stopped me from worrying about starting any new worlds. its just making a lot of clutter, an bringing more bordem to the game.

at least shorten the time. 60 days is well enough to get troops made, and yes morale is what is supposed to stop bigger players from attacking. so either please shorten the 10:1 protect time, or go back to deleting players sooner. it needs to be changed some way shape or form.


:grumble: Ronin Warrior | Horseman Gospel


YOU DON'T KNOW ME

darkkprince

Trainee

Posts: 90

Location: India

Occupation: student

  • Send private message

10

Thursday, November 3rd 2011, 10:20pm

I have the same problem.....Now since the inactive players are not getting deleted, I am hopelessly watching everyone taking up abandons one after another with almost no battle activity..Kingsage should change its name to Abandoned city builder.....This is ridiculous...They have bugs, they have incredibly stupid rules, and now they just dont have any new players coming in...Its a dead game if you ask me...And as a matter of fact some of their other games like Ikariam are getting a far better treatment...

THE RESULT : I have already shifted elsewhere, and soon everyone else will too....Then all these board operators, game operators etc can play amongst themselves for all I care..
I am the Darkkprince, but i fight for the light

NOBODY


War does not determine who is right - only who is left.
Join the Army, see the world, meet interesting people - and kill them.

grafi

Super Gameoperator

Posts: 84

Location: Hannover

  • Send private message

11

Thursday, November 3rd 2011, 10:39pm

Problems will be solved when the game starts deleting inactive players again ... I know we are already waiting a long time for this to come but it will come eventually.
KingsageTech

mikey ratt

Beginner

Posts: 1

  • Send private message

12

Friday, November 4th 2011, 3:03am

the reason this game is fatally flawed and doomed to failure

now im not sure that this is the proper place to post this but i dont really care, move it if you like or delete it.

the 60 days of protection is a good idea but the fact that a player with 288 settlements can take what it took 2 months to build in 2 days with very minimal effort leads me to believe that any new players lifespan will be exactly 62 days. sure you could join the alliance that blankets the map but that seems awfully damn boring. i played the game way back when and fell to a similar fate because i refused to join the super order and as a result was wiped off the map in less than a week, leaving me with absolutely nothing to show for after months of building. what kind of game allows a far superior force to reduce a weaker to absolutely nothing.

i gave it another chance as the building mechanics of the game are attractive and enjoyable. too bad it is fatally flawed in that when someone decides they want your settlement they simply take it and leave you with nothing. i see some posts about the number of inactive settlements. well no wonder if this is the fate of a new player. i also play battleknight and love that game. this one is an absolute waste of time and am truly amazed that it has survived as long as it has. i have a few suggestions as to how the game could be improved but im going to save my breath because the fact that it hasnt changed in the 2years since i quit the first time indicates to me that it will never change.

enough rambling from me. im going to do something more productive than playing kingsage, which would be damn near anything.

Ronin Warrior

Intermediate

Posts: 299

  • Send private message

13

Friday, November 4th 2011, 4:16am

i love the game, an the only rule i don't agree with is you can attack with a account your sitting or have sat, but defense cannot be sent. that is crazy in the head to me. i think though the rules to the game is set up pretty well. (wish the native tongue rule was still enforced) an i know of players attacking other players so anywhere i am at it's not just attack abandons...

an to losing your setts, that is the point of the game...if they took that away it wouldn't be kingsage. that is the sole purpose of the game, gain setts and or lose setts.

the 10:1 is a problem an good to see it will not continue.


:grumble: Ronin Warrior | Horseman Gospel


YOU DON'T KNOW ME

sabs546

Beginner

Posts: 39

  • Send private message

14

Sunday, November 20th 2011, 3:42pm

that's not fair though I started in a place was over atleast 10,000

and the rest 4,000,000

why didn't I start in a fair place

I lost all my setts (32,000 points)
which to me is big

in about 2-3 weeks
by 2 players both over 1,000,000
way over a million

we all start in the same radius on the map, so we all have the same advantage when starting

you said but not for me and because of that I had to restart over and over and over
I think that the rule is fine and it lets me survive even a little longer I've played this game for a long time and I could never build due to bigger settlement being right next to me so that they can just take me over

it's not fair

Hathor

Intermediate

Posts: 227

  • Send private message

15

Sunday, November 20th 2011, 4:21pm

I also have concerns about new players being able to survive in this game BUT it's not all about whether you are near a bigger player. There are a lot of ways to survive in this game.

There are some very predatory players who just see someone small as an easy target. I do not say 'good' however big they are because those players generally prefer to go after red dots. For every predatory player there is one who, if approached properly is more likely to actually help.

This is as much a social game as a war game so forming relationships with other players makes a big difference, as does getting invited into a decent alliance. It varies a lot but on occasion I've survived quite nicely while surrounded by much bigger players.
Playing as Kerowyn -

sabs546

Beginner

Posts: 39

  • Send private message

16

Friday, December 2nd 2011, 11:52pm

I know I made friends with King Malaza sorta

but he doesn't attack me anyway

but I die come back with an alliance but they aren't strong enough for it either not matter how much support they send

and then I die again and again

Blythe probably killed me 5 times now and the games not fun anymore

but I pay it just to talk to friends and and and go to alliances I tried going for the farming sort of playing style but I have to attack abandoned settlements which it still doesn't work since I don't get enough resources back

I just don't think it's fair to take that rule away

Gareeth

Game Administrator

Posts: 541

Location: Canada

  • Send private message

17

Saturday, December 3rd 2011, 12:23am

Speaking as a player who tended towards the massive side I think this rule is a good one. As a player I tend to not like having anyone in my "backyard" and while I never had any qualms about taking on a big player I would also squash a small player if they feel within what I considered to be the ever expanding borders of my kingdom. I didn't really view this as predatory so much as necessary for my own safety as the reality if you have small attackable players near you is that if you don't take them someone else will and that someone else could be someone you don't want next door.

Imbrium

Beginner

Posts: 6

  • Send private message

18

Saturday, December 3rd 2011, 7:17am

since the permanent 10:1 protection is only on the beginners' worlds and makes sense given the purpose of those worlds, I don't see it as being a bad thing for active players... however, it's utterly ABSURD how many tiny, inactive settlements are ALL OVER that world.

I think any player with < 1k points should lose 10:1 protection after the normal 60 days - anyone active is gonna have at least that many points within the first week. it makes it *very* hard for people to grow when they can't pick up those tiny setts as they lose protection - you need little setts that are easy to take in the beginning so that you can grow to a size where you have the forces to take on established players.

britboy3456

Beginner

Posts: 45

  • Send private message

19

Saturday, December 3rd 2011, 11:22am

I don't like 10:1 but can see why its useful. I like the inactives lose that protection idea though.
World 1: Sea Dragons...................................World 2: Free Spartans
World 3: Rogue Legion Rogue Emperor...........World 4: Enigma
World 5: Dark Blue Dots................................World 6: Eusten
World 7: The New Dawn forum mod................World 8: Epic-most epic
World 9: King of Scots Forum Mod..................World 10: Founder and Supreme Maniac of TheNAM
World 11: Cursed Crusaders...........................World 12: see above (world 10)

upndown1

Beginner

Posts: 3

  • Send private message

20

Wednesday, February 1st 2012, 7:40pm

This would solve the problem point blank - if they are inactive or not growing after 60 days, the are NOT playing the game, period.

I would take it a step farther and say any that are under 3k after 60 days are NOT playing and should lose protection status


Quoted from "Imbrium"

I think any player with < 1k points should lose 10:1 protection after the normal 60 days - anyone active is gonna have at least that many points within the first week. it makes it *very* hard for people to grow when they can't pick up those tiny setts as they lose protection - you need little setts that are easy to take in the beginning so that you can grow to a size where you have the forces to take on established players.

Quoted from "Imbrium"

since the permanent 10:1 protection is only on the beginners' worlds and makes sense given the purpose of those worlds, I don't see it as being a bad thing for active players... however, it's utterly ABSURD how many tiny, inactive settlements are ALL OVER that world.
  • 1
  • 2