How is this possible?
http://bbs.evony.com/showthread.php?t=87999
Printable View
How is this possible?
http://bbs.evony.com/showthread.php?t=87999
The report:
http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y211/_nora_/evony.png
Still this ponders me as to how..
Not that iwould like to use it but how they found this out..
Edit: Do the math if you can't take a rough estimate... the troops sent out is 222,188.
There is a way... Its something to do with reinforcing a member, then quitting the alliance. The troops that were reinforcing then turn on the alliance member, attacking his city. I've seen it in a thread somewhere. Ill try and find it.
In fact, the report is from today!
battle36.evony.com/default.html?logfile/20091211/65/15/6515ee2dca57324e38e7ed7754d43a68.xml
For an explanation on how I did it, see this thread: http://bbs.evony.com/showthread.php?t=87999
this issue has been brought up before.
basically reinforce an allied member with a ton of troops. Quit the alliance and send an attack to the city you reinforced. When your attack lands it will combine with all the troops you garrisoned in that city.
I believe there hasnt been any official word if this is a bug or not. Some people have been protesting cheat, abusing loophole, or whatever you want to call it.
To me seeing how anyone is capable of accessing this "tactic", the lengthy setup process (1st getting an alliance/enemy alliance to invite/accept you, 2nd reinforce a massive amounts of troops without the target player noticing, 3rd quitting the alliance, and lastly getting an attack to land.) it's plausible it might be legit.
Also there's that losing 10% of your prestige for quitting an alliance penalty. Makes me wonder if there was more thought into adding such a penalty than preventing mass alliance hopping without penalty?
Then again Evony hasnt officially said anything on the matter.
Well, it is in the Bug Report Forum now, Musical. Let us hope even though it's not that dangerous when you see the facts.. that it is fixed.
Lol, Kirby started the thread in Bug Reports before you spilled the beans.. But as also stated by Musical:^^This could still be considered a bug, seeing as its a 'loophole.'Quote:
this has been brought up before.
basically reinforce an allied member with a ton of troops. Quit the alliance and send an attack to the city you reinforced. When your attack lands it will combine with all the troops you garrisoned in that city.
I believe there hasnt been any official word if this is a bug or not. Some people have been protesting cheat, abusing loophole, or whatever you want to call it.
To me seeing how anyone is capable of accessing this "tactic", the lengthy setup process (1st getting an alliance/enemy alliance to invite/accept you, 2nd reinforce a massive amounts of troops without the target player noticing, 3rd quitting the alliance, and lastly getting an attack to land.) it's plausible it might be legit.
Also there's that losing 10% of your prestige for quitting an alliance penalty. Makes me wonder if there was more thought into adding such a penalty than preventing mass alliance hopping without penalty?
Then again Evony hasnt officially said anything on the matter.
I'm guessing this is a similar tactic a player on s4 used to destroy alliances from the inside.
Fix of greater than 125k on the attacker's end versus defender's end. I don't care how it actually works. :p
@APC: Good points.
Until Evony officially clears up this situation, to me i see it as a legit tactic. Think of it as "the suprise trojan horse attack"
I hate you APC. you made me read that silly thread and post on it :) Freedom of speech!
It's already been stated several times. Now it is in the hands of the developers and the Evony Team here on the Forums to deliver it to them.
Point is they will not do anything because they don't see it as a problem; only people like you do. Look up FoxyBunny;s response in the thread APC posted.
If you could link it here, the evidence for everyone to see would be appreciated.
No...
They may see it as a problem, but not a problem worthly of attention at the moment because it is relatively low-priority and they have other, more important tasks to complete.
I read the thread in question and saw nothing of this particular exploit mentioned.