Verified:

H4xOr WaNgEr

Forum Moderator

1914

Jun 24th 2010, 2:23:26

Starting now LaF will be operating on 48 hour retal windows, instead of the 72 hours we are all used to.

The rationale:

72 hours is a very archaic standard that was based on a server where you only obtained a turn every 40 minutes. In the current state of the game we gain turns twice as quickly. As such LaF feels that 72 hours is simply too many turns to prep for a retal.

H4
LaF FR President

Just A Thought TAM

Member

507

Jun 24th 2010, 2:23:47

Confirmed.

torment

Member

278

Jun 24th 2010, 2:24:58

H4 cant do maths!

half of 72 is 36! Not 48.

Detmer

Member

4210

Jun 24th 2010, 2:27:13

hahahahahahaha

H4xOr WaNgEr

Forum Moderator

1914

Jun 24th 2010, 2:30:18

We realize that torment, but there are other reasons for not going down to 36 :P

I also realize I have a typo in the thread title :P

enshula

Member

1935

Jun 24th 2010, 2:31:45

does that mean were doing escalating 16 hours instead of 24 hours to keep it in line?

H4xOr WaNgEr

Forum Moderator

1914

Jun 24th 2010, 2:33:16

good question!

No

enshula

Member

1935

Jun 24th 2010, 2:42:16

3*54 = 162
2*78 = 156

so its pretty close to the way it used to be

torment

Member

278

Jun 24th 2010, 2:53:05

H4 is had finallies adoptsed Jbishes.

BobbyATA

Member

2367

Jun 24th 2010, 3:08:35

good change hopefully others follow suit. I do feel like for triple taps or more a larger retal window is still warranted however... Fortunately LaF never more than 2 taps a person so this should not be an issue=)

Pangaea

Administrator
Game Development
822

Jun 24th 2010, 3:10:13

i applaud this change in policy!

it's long overdue...
-=Dave=-
Earth Empires Staff
pangaea [at] earthempires [dot] com

Boxcar - Earth Empires' Clan & Alliance Hosting
http://www.boxcarhosting.com

TheORKINMan

Member

1239

Jun 24th 2010, 3:30:14

I doubt the situation will ever come up but I personally do not accept this policy and would ignore it. 72 hours is perfectly fair for me to save up jets and hit you back for trying to farm me.
Smarter than your average bear.

Kyatoru

Member

686

Jun 24th 2010, 3:58:09

I like this policy
+Kya

Lord Tarnava

Member

936

Jun 24th 2010, 3:59:34

I love this policy

Kyatoru

Member

686

Jun 24th 2010, 3:59:50

You love lamp.
+Kya

TheORKINMan

Member

1239

Jun 24th 2010, 4:02:06

Just out of curiosity how many people who are saying they like the policy are in LaF here? :P

Personally if you want to be fair and if I were from a smaller alliance I would accept 48 for one hit, and add on 24 for each additional hit. That sounds more like fair to me :P
Smarter than your average bear.

Kyatoru

Member

686

Jun 24th 2010, 4:06:38

I'm not in Laf. I've been in Laf once. And I've warred Laf too.
I just think it's a good change for the server. It helps encourage more LG's. Unfortunately I do see how, right now in the current circumstances, it encourages more farming of the very small handful of small alliances.
+Kya

Beltshumeltz

Member

147

Jun 24th 2010, 4:45:02

It's an improvement over old policy. Good.

TheORKINMan

Member

1239

Jun 24th 2010, 4:49:50

And I'd also like to see some candor. You are the biggest alliance in the game. You COULD just admit this has nothing to do with turns coming faster and more to do about stopping the amount of "legit" retals you take.
Smarter than your average bear.

enshula

Member

1935

Jun 24th 2010, 5:11:24

h4 did say that orkin:

"As such LaF feels that 72 hours is simply too many turns to prep for a retal."

since turns coming faster had increased potentially the amount or silliness of retals everyone was taking

its obviously that the game state changes over time, if a retal 5 minutes later is fine, which i believe it is, and a retal 5 weeks later could be silly and discourage landgrabbing

then a retal somewhere inbetween should be acceptable and strike a balance

TheORKINMan

Member

1239

Jun 24th 2010, 5:18:43

If you wanted to strike a balance then discouraging farming should be there as well, which is why time based on the number of grabs would be reasonable.
Smarter than your average bear.

enshula

Member

1935

Jun 24th 2010, 5:54:52

too long and no one grabs
too short and people get over farmed

but i do want some other changes to prevent farming, i want additional DR's put in the game that make a country grabbing the same country multiple times get less land than if lots of countries grabbed a country once each

i also would like GDI to reduce losses by 10% and cost a bit more, and all untagged to get reduced losses by 10% as well

note you can reduce losses without gains being reduced, but youd need to make sure the ratio of land gained to lost didnt change for land traders so if you grab someone when in GDI i think your gains should be reduced by 10% but their losses should be normal

as to someone detagging for the purposes of landtrading or self farming, the 10% loss reduction could kick in only after 24 hours, so anyone else who wanted to grab you in that time could as well

theres a lot of idea floating around about reducing farming, look at some of the DR posts on bugs and suggestions that could reduce a 2nd hit to 80% and a third to 60% and so on

Theseus

Member

66

Jun 24th 2010, 6:23:05

The only thing I don't like about this is it has the potential to fluff over someone who needs to do multiple retals (be it L:L or because of multiple grabs) on LaF if they need virtually any time whatsoever to gather the resources to do so or don't have a bunch of countries sitting on a stockpile of Jets. Organizing Off allies is also a realtime thing and has nothing to do with ingame turn accumulation.

If a few LaF TTRs get together and plan a day where they all grab say..Neofed twice, Neofed now has 48 hours to do 6 (assuming no escalating retals) retals. Unless their Jetter plays in the next 8 hours, which in itself is unlikely, that gives time for at most 2 PS retals. They would essentially need 3+ people (20% of their alliance) to be capable of retalling the biggest of LaF TTRs to get that done. No way does that happen.

The change makes some degree of sense but I don't like it given the state of the game. It really has the potential for any big alliances who use this to really abuse small alliances if they want :/

Kyatoru

Member

686

Jun 24th 2010, 6:26:32

I love Theseus. So does my beer. love love love
+Kya

Kyatoru

Member

686

Jun 24th 2010, 6:27:31

btw thats why neofed should just kill their topranker
+Kya

Theseus

Member

66

Jun 24th 2010, 6:31:24

Right, and then Neo gets tagkilled in 90 minutes and the game loses another 18 players.

The policy is fine as long as those who use it don't abuse it by putting out a large number of hits (or even one well placed topfeed) on a specific alliance knowing there's no possible way they can get all the retals done in the new time window.

Kyatoru

Member

686

Jun 24th 2010, 6:34:46

neofed wont lose anyone if they know how to run an alliance. come on, we've both been in alliances that got hammered the hell out of for a reset and had the leadership strength to recover just fine
+Kya

Dragonlance

Member

1611

Jun 24th 2010, 6:35:43

considering that theseus basically took a real example from ingame based on laf's treatment of neofed earlier this set, i seriously doubt they won't abuse it.

Up to us to take a stand i guess

Kyatoru

Member

686

Jun 24th 2010, 6:35:49

Oh, I even led an alliance into war against laf and had IX called in to tag kill me. fun times
+Kya

Kyatoru

Member

686

Jun 24th 2010, 6:36:12

Originally posted by Kyatoru:
Oh, I even led an alliance into war against laf and had IX called in to tag kill me. we came out ahead. fun times
+Kya

Dragonlance

Member

1611

Jun 24th 2010, 6:37:26

Originally posted by Kyatoru:
Originally posted by Kyatoru:
Oh, I even led an alliance into war against laf and had IX called in to tag kill me. we came out ahead. fun times

Kyatoru

Member

686

Jun 24th 2010, 6:39:10

heh i hate these little board icons, i always click the wrong one
+Kya

Theseus

Member

66

Jun 24th 2010, 6:44:02

No disrespect to Neo, but if they could handle such things they wouldn't be an alliance that comes and goes and has huge membership fluctuations like they do. The only qualm I have with the survival of the fittest mentality is that the game was a hell of a lot more fun when the "less fit" were still hanging around.

Earth needs bad players too (again no offense Neo, not calling you guys bad :). We can't expect everyone to coddle them, but a change like this gives a clear path to victimizing any small alliance a big alliance who adopts this policy feels like victimizing. I trust and respect LaF enough to hope they will not go that route, but this certainly gives them an opening to do just that (without violating any policies) if they would desire.

Theseus

Member

66

Jun 24th 2010, 6:44:54

Weird double post.

Edited By: Theseus on Jun 24th 2010, 6:45:13

Forgotten1

Member

834

Jun 24th 2010, 6:50:31

This is half encouraging more people to carry more defense, discouraging all explorers that want to net with 10k turrets.

I like.

Yes, I'm in LaF, but I've never been in the conversation about this policy change at all. I just learned about it here.
Forgotten
ICQ 43083642
MSN

enshula

Member

1935

Jun 24th 2010, 7:16:56

ps's were changed from 22 to 20 hours which made it easier to do 3 retals in 72 hours, since you could start at 12 hours rather than 6 hours after the first hit

thats another factor you need to take into account

snawdog

Member

2413

Jun 24th 2010, 10:03:57

Originally posted by Theseus:
The only thing I don't like about this is it has the potential to fluff over someone who needs to do multiple retals (be it L:L or because of multiple grabs) on LaF if they need virtually any time whatsoever to gather the resources to do so or don't have a bunch of countries sitting on a stockpile of Jets. Organizing Off allies is also a realtime thing and has nothing to do with ingame turn accumulation.

If a few LaF TTRs get together and plan a day where they all grab say..Neofed twice, Neofed now has 48 hours to do 6 (assuming no escalating retals) retals. Unless their Jetter plays in the next 8 hours, which in itself is unlikely, that gives time for at most 2 PS retals. They would essentially need 3+ people (20% of their alliance) to be capable of retalling the biggest of LaF TTRs to get that done. No way does that happen.

The change makes some degree of sense but I don't like it given the state of the game. It really has the potential for any big alliances who use this to really abuse small alliances if they want :/


That is the only reason this is LaFs new policy, i think there may have been some legit retals made against them in that 48-72 hr. window and they just wanna shut that down to protect themselves and increse the amt of grabs they can do.
ICQ 364553524
msn






Sifos

Member

1419

Jun 24th 2010, 10:05:07

I see alot of funny wars evolving from this in the near future. Thank you LaF.
Imaginary Numbers
If you're important enough to contact me, you will know how to contact me.
Self appointed emperor of the Order of Bunnies.
The only way to be certain your allies will not betray you is to kill them all!

torment

Member

278

Jun 24th 2010, 10:50:01

Imag do seem to have a little teeny tiny problem called LCN to deal with thou.

Requiem

Developer

5688

Jun 24th 2010, 11:54:32

I like this policy as it is logical.

TAN

Member

3173

Jun 24th 2010, 12:14:52

The retal window has nothing to do with turns, as it now as, and it hasn't been for like 10 years.

It has to do with a window in which to retal, not how many turns you can mass up.

If we went by that logic, than 24 hours is more than enough time to retal.

Anyways, I doubt anyone will recognize this.

Remember, when LaF attacks another alliance, you are effectively submitting to their "contract" on retals. Does this sound silly? Well this is the same thing I was told by LaF FAs, so don't complain when other alliances take 72 hours to retal you.

If you do complain and don't recognize it, then you're hypocrites. Nuff said.
FREEEEEDOM!!!

NukEvil

Member

4311

Jun 24th 2010, 12:27:22

LaF's actions will speak far more loudly than their members on the boards in the near future, regarding this.

For example, if a LaF member farms someone in a smaller alliance for, say, 10 LGs, then that alliance can get in contact with LaF and ask them for more time to do the retals. Alliances increase their retal windows for other alliances in special cases all the time. If LaF refuses to do this in a 'special' case, then we'll all know what their true intentions are.

The important thing is for FAs to get in contact with LaF. If LaF ignores you, then that's another indicator of their true intentions.
I am a troll. Everything I say must be assumed to be said solely to provoke an exaggerated reaction to the current topic. I fully intend to bring absolutely no substance to any discussion, ongoing or otherwise. Conversing with me is pointless.

Just A Thought TAM

Member

507

Jun 24th 2010, 12:31:05

"if a LaF member farms someone in a smaller alliance for, say, 10 LGs"

Then that's the problem right there and a change in retal policies means nothing to that small alliance.

anoniem

Member

2881

Jun 24th 2010, 12:53:09

i'm going to triple tap laf now and then make a huge jump so they can't retal me in 48hrs!!

woooo free land :P
re(ally)tired

enshula

Member

1935

Jun 24th 2010, 13:05:54

well hopefully game changes means no one wants to farm any one country 10 times

as to one alliance hitting another alot thats trickier and only really gets avoided by bots/fakecountrys/massnewplayers

iTavi

Member

647

Jun 24th 2010, 14:05:21

good ideea indeed, and it could be (as someone said in here) extended with X hours for additional hits.

however i still need to sign a pact where this thing is mentioned before i will consider it true and official :)
~

H4xOr WaNgEr

Forum Moderator

1914

Jun 24th 2010, 14:14:27

tags with 20 - 30 people shouldn't' be relying on only one or 2 countries to retal for them anyway. If they are that is a systemic problem with their own alliance organization and not a valid reason to keep retal windows so long.

Too many people have some kind of sense of entitlement when it comes to land. If you can't muster a retal then you lose the land. If you don't like it then work to improve your countries so that you can retal successfully. It is that simple really.

Edited By: H4xOr WaNgEr on Jun 24th 2010, 14:31:49

H4xOr WaNgEr

Forum Moderator

1914

Jun 24th 2010, 14:16:02

and as for the potential "abuses" people pull the same stunts now with 72 hour windows, there is really no difference in that regard.

People LGing usually prefer not to get retaled, and will usually look for situations where that is likely.

I don't see what is wrong with this, it is a game and land grabbing is a part of it.

TheORKINMan

Member

1239

Jun 24th 2010, 14:29:22

As long as you don't complain about the suicides and other unseemly things that inevitably arise from this retal policy as being unfair that's fine.
Smarter than your average bear.

ZIP

Member

3222

Jun 24th 2010, 16:21:21

I don't see what is wrong with this, it is a game and land grabbing is a part of it.

and if you can't take it, war them ;)
fluff your 300 Spartans fool - i have 32 of the biggest fluffed mother fluffers made of titanium !!
A brigade from Blackstreetboyz (#91) has invaded your lands! Your defenses held against the invaders and forced them away! Your military lost:1 Troops