Page 2 of 48 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 476

Thread: They want to fix comforting!

  1. #11

    Default

    Comforting is not the the problem. It takes 90 minutes for a city to get from 15 to 0. I could very easily, as a live player, comfort, run off and do some chores, come back long before my city is in any real danger, and comfort again.

    The only way to "fix" it would be to make it so any city is cappable, even if the player is online. Which would mean the only way to defend your cities is to make them hard as balls to break, IE 500m+ upkeep in EVERY city.

    Ya. That'll fix Botting.

    Quote Originally Posted by Spritze View Post
    People do try to rob banks. They usually fail though, or give up cause they can't find a way to get through all the security systems.

    Why do people murder other people? Why do people do all kinds of other stuff that leads you to prison?

    If people are so easy to control and make afraid of the prison (reading your comment, I get the picture you assume this).. Why aren't all the prisons empty?
    Do people still do those things? Yes. Will people always do those things? Yes.

    BUT, I know I don't personally go out and rob banks or murder people, because I don't want to go to prison. If there were no penalty, I'd do it every day. Harsh punishment is not a deterrent to 100% of the possible rule breakers, never will be. There will always be people who don't care.

    However, it does deter a large part of the possible rule breakers, and as it stands right now there is virtually no punishment at all for breaking the rules. So that large percentage of people who otherwise wouldn't bot for fear of being banned, have no reason to not bot.

    Your argument appears to be, harsh punishment won't work because it won't stop EVERYONE... so let's not punish anyone.
    Last edited by cushseth; 07-29-2012 at 12:22 PM.
    SS37

    Less QQ more PewPew

    Quote Originally Posted by Prodigy the 5 View Post
    cush has a point... and he is right
    Ya.

  2. #12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Spritze View Post
    I can't figure out a way they make that possible...
    There is no way. Whatever man can achieve, man can undo.


    People do try to rob banks. They usually fail though, or give up cause they can't find a way to get through all the security systems.

    Why do people murder other people? Why do people do all kinds of other stuff that leads you to prison?

    If people are so easy to control and make afraid of the prison (reading your comment, I get the picture you assume this).. Why aren't all the prisons empty?
    There are always people who attempt to game the system. This is why such penalities are called 'deterrants' and not 'solutions'.

    If you want to solve the botting problem, you need a deterrant sufficient that the average player will not want to chance the consequences (i.e. first time, warning, 3 day ban, loss of all troops/resources; 2nd time, reset your account to new player status; 3rd strike, perma-ban.)

    If anything, the proposed changes to the comforting system will actually *encourage* botting, since with the loss of comforting more players are going to be of the mindset they need to amass larger and larger armies to protect their cities. This translates into more resource requirements, more alts, and more bots.

    Remember, the Law of Unintended Consequences often applies, because the developers aren't the ones who actually play the game.

    I'm reminded of a quote from Thalin which has long since been deleted from the forums, claiming Evony never intended for people to have armies as large as they do.

    Problem is, as with any competition, people are going to seek a mechanism to beat their opponent. This has translated into larger and larger armies.. person A attacked me with an army of 1m archers, so I need 1m archers to defend now. Person A sees I have 1m archers and figures he needs 2m now. I see he has 2m, so I 2.5m. Cycle repeats itself.

    However, I digress, and am getting off topic.

    There are a myriad of reasons why people bot. Removing the comforting system does not solve the underlying problem. Yes, it may mean that you can now cap a city of a botted player, which is difficult (albeit not impossible) to do these days; however it seems to me that such a change is a statement from Evony that they are holding up the white flag and fundlementally stating that they are incapable of solving the botting problem (or, more likely, don't want to deal with it due to the financial implications.)

  3. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TentPig View Post

    There are a myriad of reasons why people bot. Removing the comforting system does not solve the underlying problem. Yes, it may mean that you can now cap a city of a botted player, which is difficult (albeit not impossible) to do these days; however it seems to me that such a change is a statement from Evony that they are holding up the white flag and fundlementally stating that they are incapable of solving the botting problem (or, more likely, don't want to deal with it due to the financial implications.)
    I pretty much said the same thing, so I'm gonna ignore all that other nonsense lol.

    This is exactly what it means. They don't want to cure the disease, just get rid of a few of the symptoms.
    SS37

    Less QQ more PewPew

    Quote Originally Posted by Prodigy the 5 View Post
    cush has a point... and he is right
    Ya.

  4. #14

    Default

    I'm not sure what stops you from robbing a bank, but for me, robbing a bank is taking money that is not mine, as mine. I believe people are rational, and because of that, have the capability to be ethical (though this can be defined in a great many number of ways). Its unethical for me to rob a bank, so I don't do it. The punishment for robbing a bank is a secondary demotivator for me, and hopefully a lot of other people.

    Comforting is not the only issue that bots can exploit beyond reasonableness, but changing it can level up the playing field. I am a strong believer that you should not be able to keep a city that you cannot defend. Comforting to keep a city is not defending it. I don't see a reason why anyone, botter or not, should be able to just get online, and comfort to keep their city and lose no troops in doing so. Any city should be capturable, whether offline or online. If you are online, you have at least 90 minutes to move troops in if you do not have any defending.

    I do however agree that there is no punishment for those that cheat, but to put it frankly, nearly everyone has cheated at some point or another. To truly be fair while also being just, they would have to equally punish all those that have cheated. And that, while I wouldn't mind it, is not reasonable.

    I saw a solution posted by Kiki on the feedback forums that I agree with on that subject, definately worth a look at.
    NA24: CELTS - Retired
    NA33: INSOMNIA - Retired
    NA43: Relapse

  5. #15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Blah99200 View Post
    I'm not sure what stops you from robbing a bank, but for me, robbing a bank is taking money that is not mine, as mine. I believe people are rational, and because of that, have the capability to be ethical (though this can be defined in a great many number of ways). Its unethical for me to rob a bank, so I don't do it. The punishment for robbing a bank is a secondary demotivator for me, and hopefully a lot of other people.
    I would take solace in the fact that the peoples money is insured up to $250,000, and wouldn't feel very guilty about stealing from the government.

    But that's an argument for another day, lol. The simple fact is most people are not ethical beings, and in most cases it is the prison r@pe that deters them.
    SS37

    Less QQ more PewPew

    Quote Originally Posted by Prodigy the 5 View Post
    cush has a point... and he is right
    Ya.

  6. #16

    Default

    Oh I like this thread!


    Heres my take on it......

    I don't agree with removing speech text completely from FB......what should have been done was create a post similar to black death (penicillin) where you can only get 1 per day "IF" someone decides to waste a click on your post. A cool-down also incorporated with the use of any speech text....maybe 4 hours or so. The Free-Forever players need every small advantage the game gives, you need that group of players just as much as the heavy coiners.

    As far as bumping loyalty via comforting my solution would be to utilize public grievance and city loyalty as 2 separate entities completely. The current setup has all loyalty boosts that increase both grievance and loyalty (disaster relief and praying). Lets just say when either of the 2 are maxed out the player city is gone. 100 public grievance the city automatically npc's due to the fact that the people in the city are ****ed off and revolt. Zero loyalty and the city is capture-able by the player attacking.

    Instead of disaster relief increasing loyalty by 5 / PG by 15 and praying increasing loyalty by 25 / PG by 5. Each comforting option only allows the increase of 1 of the 2 forms. The lowering of PG would obviously have to be re-worked as you can currently beat it up to 100 in a matter of minutes if you know what your doing. The comforting options would also need to be adjusted to level the playing field for both the attacker and defender. Having to manage both PG and loyalty individually would stop the endless bot cycle of comforting and create more of a challenge for the online player to keep their own flag flying above their city. I have a formula figured as to how this would better serve the community but since evony employees don't give a sh1t about what anyone thinks I'll keep the details to myself.

    Everyone knows the defender has always had the advantage even if they get wiped out. I'm a "don't fix it till it's broken" type of guy......problem is it's been broken long enough why fix it now.

    Some form or fashion of this implemented would definitely peak my interest enough to come back and coin once more, I know plenty of top tier players that would feel the same. Changes should be made on FUTURE SERVERS ONLY as to not **** off current players and drive them away as with all the other changes without warning.
    Last edited by xTONYx; 07-29-2012 at 01:33 PM.

  7. #17

    Default

    lol comforting has been like then forever so y fix it now ;P
    If the French were really intelligent, they'd speak English
    Alls Fair In Love n War

  8. #18

    Default

    i gotta say.. this is one of the dumbest ideas ive ever read.. lets take out comforting but you cant even give us some d@mn commas in the reports section u guys make no sense
    Quote Originally Posted by acer5200 View Post
    PS: Mech wasn't trolling.

  9. #19

    Default

    the ability to comfort is one of the core levelling aspects of the game.

    if someone ports their warcity with 50 million archers next to your city, should you just be required to hand it over to them? no

    if evony wants to "level the playing field" they need to implement troop caps, stop multi accounting, and ban botters with an iron fist. without multiple accounts, most botters wont have the massive troop counts that force smaller players to comfort.

    for frick sake evony stop trying to cover your own massive failures by seeking stupid changes to the structure of the game

    ban the cheaters pure and simple, that will fix the game

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    noobin round your vallies
    Posts
    145

    Default

    i want to have fun while attacking and defending.
    its that simple, 24hr loy raising and attacking closed gates is boring, i don't care if they bot or account share, i just want to be able to fight someone,

    im sure alot of you have ported on a hc only to have it loy raise till you leave, or had someone port to your state then attack offline players while keeping their gates closed.

    they take our 16? no problem, we'll be able to take it back. i would LOVE to be able to fight for a 16 (or for anything really...), defending or attacking idc, a fight's a fight.

    sig done by Morgan le Fay

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
  •