Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 51

Thread: HC and Holiday

Hybrid View

  1. #1

    Default

    A few bad apples use holiday just to escape. But, that does not negate the legitimate purpose for which it was created to begin with. Evony has two choices here.

    1) Treat everyone like bad apples, and end the holiday mode option.
    2) Treat everyone like good apples, and suffer a few abuses of the mode.

    Evony has to keep the holiday mode despite the few bad apples. People need a way to go on vacation/business trip/military deployment/etc...
    Quote Originally Posted by Lazzzzzzzzalicious! View Post
    i started to read this and agree with everything rota says. if people just listened to him the forums would be a better place.
    Quote Originally Posted by Dawnseeker View Post
    Rota is correct.

    I don't even understand the question.

  2. #2

    Default

    If someone goes into holiday mode while they have Attacks incoming those Attacks will land. Just no more can be sent according to the new changes. So Quote what suits you.... But leave out the whole part which means your arguement is null and void.

    Once you enter holiday mode any Attacks incoming will hit. You can not have re-inforcements NOR can you defend. You can't do anything but hope while your locked out so quit complaining about how unfair it is PLEASE
    Quote Originally Posted by Demonhero View Post
    Like the fact that there is a "process" for luck. I bet his real process is that he hired a midget to dress up like a leprechaun and dance on his computer, wearing a necklace of rabbit feet and the number seven.
    Historical Cities: 2 2 1 0

  3. #3

    Default

    Sometimes things happen in real life and Evony has to take a back seat.

    I would not go in to Holiday mode just to avoid a fight.

    You can't do anything in holiday mode, no research, no troop building, no farming, no fighting.

  4. #4

    Default

    In my experience, the TOS only seems to be enforced to certain players/alliances on NA1.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    62

    Default

    I don't see this as an improper tactic or going to a low level. To the contrary, it is precisely the sort of attack that the current game mechanics require if you are to have any hope - ANY - of taking a prized target from another player who remains online for an extended period of time. The absurdity in all of this is that the game mechanics actually allow a city under siege to avoid capture in this way for such an extended period.

    Historical Heroes :39 Historical Cities :3 3 1 *

  6. #6

    Default

    I'm trying my best to make this clear. The person is cheating and that is wrong. I accept that you have every right to do this continuous attack. I just personally don't like that particular tactic. It doesn't mean I don't like you, and do not empathize with your position. After a day or two of "around the clock" attacks, I would prefer to lay off a target for a while.

    Do I not have a right to dislike a few thousand attacks on one target every day for nearly a month? Do I not have a right to think that might be a bit "excessive?"

    I'm completely on your side about the cheating, I'm just uncomfortable with the tactic.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lazzzzzzzzalicious! View Post
    i started to read this and agree with everything rota says. if people just listened to him the forums would be a better place.
    Quote Originally Posted by Dawnseeker View Post
    Rota is correct.

    I don't even understand the question.

  7. #7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rota View Post
    I'm trying my best to make this clear. The person is cheating and that is wrong. I accept that you have every right to do this continuous attack. I just personally don't like that particular tactic. It doesn't mean I don't like you, and do not empathize with your position. After a day or two of "around the clock" attacks, I would prefer to lay off a target for a while.

    Do I not have a right to dislike a few thousand attacks on one target every day for nearly a month? Do I not have a right to think that might be a bit "excessive?"

    I'm completely on your side about the cheating, I'm just uncomfortable with the tactic.
    I can understand your point of view. And, if Hughesy was holding the city fair and square, I could even agree with it. But, at this point, he will NEVER know any peace while he holds Atlantis...I've even timed hits to "land" during maintenance. If it were Nailbomb or any other Khans holding Atlantis this way, Evony would have already NPC'd the city...
    Last edited by kistari; 10-14-2010 at 10:45 AM.

  8. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rota View Post
    Do I not have a right to dislike a few thousand attacks on one target every day for nearly a month? Do I not have a right to think that might be a bit "excessive?"

    I'm completely on your side about the cheating, I'm just uncomfortable with the tactic.

    How else can we provide concrete, absolute PROOF of the cheating?

    The records are there, in our war reports - right from when this started. Evony only has to check those...

    At a rough estimate we are talking about 8,000-plus pages at this stage. Unfortunately, depending on the frequency of our attacks (roughly 300-800 per day on Atlantis only - we hit several other targets , some of them frequently), the war reports 'vanish' as they get older. The oldest reports that we have access to are never older than 7-8 days, and we can never access more than 3100 - 4500 pages. I assume this is due to in-game storage limitations.

    The pattern is crystal clear: gates mainly closed, comforting when loyalty drops beyond the current account sharer's tolerance level. We are even seeing patterns indicating specific account sharers. We know when another player takes over by the slight changes in comforting pattern and opening gates on spam waves.

    I repeat: Evony, PROOF BEYOND DOUBT IS IN THE WAR REPORTS!

  9. #9

    Default

    I would say there's more than enough proof after 3-4 days of solid attacking. Three weeks is way more than enough proof. If proof is the only reason you are attacking, then you can stop. But, I doubt it's the only reason you're attacking. You will probably continue to attack out of spite, which might not be a reason that is 100% good for the soul.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lazzzzzzzzalicious! View Post
    i started to read this and agree with everything rota says. if people just listened to him the forums would be a better place.
    Quote Originally Posted by Dawnseeker View Post
    Rota is correct.

    I don't even understand the question.

  10. #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rota View Post
    But, I doubt it's the only reason you're attacking. You will probably continue to attack out of spite, which might not be a reason that is 100% good for the soul.

    Spite?

    Atlantis is a legitimate (and perhaps the ultimate) target.

    Despite the fact that it is currently protected by illegitimate means, we will continue to attack until one of the account sharers blinks again ... and we will take Atlantis - like we took Athens.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •