
Originally Posted by
neko_lord
One thing that was not really stated strongly enough is that a circumstance where someone from the same alliance drops out to take a city before someone from a hostile alliance can do so means one critical thing:
The player whose city is being saved is in 99% or higher of cases NOT account-sharing.
Please read that again.
The only reason this happens is because nobody has the login information for the person being attacked. If the login information is available, then nobody would drop out. Instead, the city would be comforted and the person now signed in would handle gate toggling, which would still prevent the other alliance from taking the city.
In the final analysis, the attacking player / alliance will still have a chance of not getting the city, thus a cooldown for this purpose will not be anywhere near as effective as what you believe that it will be.
The bigger question though is, are you all, as a company, sure that you want to add an additional punishment for someone obeying the rules of the game, and thereby giving them an incentive for not obeying the rules?
Bookmarks