First, I certainly can't take credit for all of this, as qz had the clan tag idea but I took it in my own direction. Secondly, given the strength in restarting recently implemented (which I think is great), suiciders are going to be stronger. We need to retard the tards.

1) Everyone in alliance has to be in a tag. This is for everyone's benefit. For a tag to be activated and players able to play their countries it must have 3 members. This prevents just anyone from making a tag.

2) A clan cannot make more than 3 attacks per member, within 24hrs, against another tag without declaring war first. This would still allow retals. Countries in a tag cannot do special attacks unless the tag is at war with the tag they're hitting. This could go even further and pacts could be reflected in game so that clean A & B that have a UNAP can make it so their players don't even have the option of hitting eachother. This also kills cross alliance landtrading. SOF could set LAF to a mode that we simply can't hit them.

3) When war is declared everything opens up and you can make as many attacks as you want.

4) If you die, you cannot change your country name. You can simply just restart. Suciiders and assholes have all of the power. If they want to behave poorly they should not be able to hide in restart.

5) The person controlling the tags can see the ee account member names of the countries in their tag. If people use multiple names and aliases they get deleted.

That's a lot of untagged countries / players you might drive off the server.

-1

you need suiciders.

it's the extra bit of unpredictability in the game that makes it exciting, it's the chaos element.

without risk there is no reward.

I don't like #2. LGing is not suiciding. If my alliance has a pact with almost every major tag and I want to attack 4 or 5 members of an unpacted alliance that's not suiciding.

Great idea! We could use the same idea to stop warring clans from driving netters from the game by for instance stopping them for warring the same clan two sets in a row.

I like where your going with the idea Helmet, however i think Atryn is right, as well do this type of stuff will ultimately remove ability to play the game besides netting.

Just my 2cents

Sometimes it's good for people to learn that farming a GDI untagged may actually have unintended consequences.

there are so many problems with this game, and i personally think suiciders are at the bottom of the totem pole.

we need bots.

imo the thing is that there is a certain aspect to this game involving the ability to play untagged or hide your identity when you restart. If you keep country names the same and force restarts to tag then potentially you can make restarting very hard in more involved wars.
I'm not sure suiciding is an issue that needs to be dealt with in such a severe way.. Mind you, this is coming from someone who one set had his tag kill almost every single untagged country on the server (we did accept NAP's from some individuals).... :P

I'd really like to agree with you on at least one of the idea's. But I can't, they all suck.

why are you guys making the game so complicated with all these rules. Just play the damn game and stop being politicians.

NEWT GINGRICH'S IGNORANCE FTW!!!!

It was just a random thought this morning, but I agree that suiciding is a minor issue in the game at this moment. In hindsight it's a lot of work for something that really isn't much of an issue. I was just thinking this morning about how to code out some of the negative conduct that happens in this game. A lot of people have really bad attitudes and it's contagious.

I don't think making people tag will kill the alliance game though, if someone wants to play they'll join a tag. If they don't want to join a tag they probably have bad intentions.

I still really like QZ's idea of tag control with setting DNA's, etc. and I like the idea of seeing the usernames of the people in your tag (but it's only useful if people can't use aliases).

Hawkeye: Can you do that in 24hrs? I would have thought that would get you killed.

martin: I think if you're in a war you shouldn't get to hide your country.

The other point I was going to make is that in express some very strict requirements have been put in place. I think they've been very sucessfull and taken a game that would have been utter chaos, given the amount of turns (lots of people going nuts suiciding), and made it a solid and fun server to play.

There is no reason we couldn't brainstorm and improve some things.

btw: Technically you could do this unless everyone in your alliance had already hit the tag 3 times.

1) Sort of makes sense. The downside is that it just drives suiciders into tags... sure we get their IPs then but that is about it... could be good for any random who wants to play and doesn't have the sense to get in an alliance... not that there are many of them anymore...
2) Definitely does not kill land trading but I suppose some of the fascist tags would like to be able to exercise more control over their members.
3) I feel like this is addressing some other issue... what is the purpose of this? Is it so suiciders have to make tags or join big tags to get off their full allotment of hits?
4) I think this is really a great fix for suiciders... the country you make for the round is the country you make for the round. You live with the repercussions all set long.
5) I do think multiple names and aliases are supposed to be deleted... of course there are always ways around that but it would be good for it to be harder for people... I don't like the idea of any players getting access to account names. Sure it could help in the same way as getting IPs but is more invasive to someone's ingame privacy.

@5) multiple names and aliases are against the game rules and generally get you deleted. We have made exceptions for people who abandon a previous alias completely and start a new one or some other extenuating circumstances (never to allow breaking of any other game rule).

This whole thread is dumb. I am way against all these changes.

1) Doesn't solve anything. If you cannot play your turns until you join a tag, then there needs to be a system for new players to "sign up" for a tag in game. Suiciders would just make a tag.

2) Doesn't stop land trading. 3 attacks per member is more than sufficient. If I wanted to landtrade 5 attacks, I would maybe do 2 trades with PDM, and then 3 trades with RD. You get the idea. If the limit is lower, just involve more tags. And I would just declare war to go around the limit anyways.

Forced uNAPs in game also doesn't stop land trading. Can just agree verbally (like right now) not to hit each other, but allow land trade and not do a in-game uNAP.

3) No comment, since its really part of the followup to (2).

4) This would affect wars by not allowing restarts to play untagged and grow incognito. But there are already ways to track restarts by their restart time, and now with their restart bonuses.

5) Not as useful as you think. A good multi wouldn't use similar names or aliases. However, it prevents known suicider accounts, so they could just abandon their account to make a new one (which martian allows one post above mine).

4) If you die, you cannot change your country name. You can simply just restart. Suciiders and assholes have all of the power. If they want to behave poorly they should not be able to hide in restart.

Making insulting restart names during a war is one of the few joys I still get from this game.

imo the thing is that there is a certain aspect to this game involving the ability to play untagged or hide your identity when you restart. -

you know with the restart changes, once a sucider is killed, you can mark him every time he tries to make another country

hmm not sure you can do it exactly? you can see roughly that this is the only country sort of fitting the profile that was created but not specific rule

Xinhuan:

1) If you want to suicide you have to find 2 other players or join a clan. It is an inconvenience and deterrent in that regard.

2) The 3 attack thing isn't about landtrading. It's about suiciding.

4) Yes, it would and given that restarts have been given more power I think it's ok.

5) If they delete the multiple accounts I think it would be useful. If i chose to have an alias and lost my Helmet account I would be upset and cry my eyes out.

Detmer:

2 & 3 go together. If you want to do an FS or suicide with special attacks then the tag must declare war. This would also prevent mistyped numbers, etc.

Well, if they go down this route then the number should be higher because I could see someone doing the home, work, and mobile phone route to create the requiste number of countries. And so the anti-suiciding strategy would lead to more cheating.

Sure, any of this is up for tweaking/changing/substituting. I just thought of this on the pooper this morning and thought I'd toss it out there.

So it wasn't Slagpit or Pang, it was Helmet?

Great ideas - these (or some variation) need to be implemented ASAP.

Cheers, nice work Helmet!

I never thought this forum could get more retarted, then i read this crap.

Here is an idea. How about u just remove attacking and we wil make this a netters only game. I mean really? trying to remove suiciding? fluff off, you need suiciding, without the top alliances would be able to do what ever they wanted with impunity knowing they can piss people of without repercussions.

Take the idea of removing suiciding shove it up your arse, and never speak of it again

helmet's #2 would make landtrade pacts bit useless.

1) Get more defense than the people on the same land as you.

2) Don't make enemies.


OR/AND

Don't react to them or care about them.

Some of these might be tricky to implement, and cause unintended consequences;

One of the main reasons I want to put in more formalized alliances is for stats tracking; to have alliance profiles & detailed info to show off of your clan; and track how an alliance improves (I also would like a nice war scoring function, I liked the NW Destroyed idea somebody came up with, modulated by something perhaps, attack numbers, forces sent perhaps... something about success; though that makes "early wars" worse even if they're more epic... need some sort of sc2/chess-like ranking systems)

The addition of entering pacts in would allow an alliance to police its members a little more easily, lowering the barrier to entry for n00b clans, and also allow further stat tracking & displayed info (join our clan, we have DNH's with everyone!)


While I admit suiciders are an annoyance, their ability to destroy land has been significantly reduced; I would probably support a no-self-delete in 72h after grabbing thing; or perhaps a "you can still grab dead/deleted countries" thing... perhaps with death resetting DR to 0; that would be interesting...

Those suggestions sound very interesting.

if untagged farms alliance a and has been farmed earlier into deep dr by alliances b-d then alliance a won't get lost land back due dr and due alliance b farms it right after it starts farming alliance a.

Helmet is an asshole. I hate everything he says.

you should have flushed.

I'd say it's more like the war alliances can do whatever they want, because netters actually care about smaller clans hitting them... But yeah nevertheless suiciders keep people from doing fluffheadish things ;)

Helmet: I was just giving comments on possible side effects, and/or consequences. My comments wasn't specifically targeted at its effectiveness.

Particularly, a suicider clan can still declare war on another clan and suicide them, the only hard part would of course be forming up the tag, and I'm not sure we should be raising the barrier to entry for new alliances (non-suiciding ones).


QZ: I suggested "NW Destroyed" metric on B&S on a team changes possible fixes thread, but by itself also has problems, and will need to be modified by other factors as you said.

I wish I had. Then you wouldn't have been here to post. :)

i agree w/ scode - you need suciders, or at least the ability to sucide to keep people in line. If not then why not piss pound every untagged into the dirt, or small clan, rape them

I agree with iScode here, this is going too far. I stayed silent while all the "top feeding" policies came into play, but now, I'm gonna blast off on this one.

You bigger crews just can't stand a challenge, can you? Power can shift a little, get over it. Every time certain larger alliances see a challenge in their face they try to adopt rules and policies to protect their position. I understand that once you get in a good position, you want to stay there, but this is going a little too far.

Now, making a policy to protect your land fat countries (referred to as "top feeding") is fully understandable and a completely internal undertaking. No harm done there as long as you can back the policy up decisively without breaking any rules.

But going on to change the entire game from the code on up to protect yourselves? Come on, that's just egotistical. Have some testicular fortitude for a fluffing challenge, and here's another idea: Stop doing things that create suiciders. You can't keep everyone happy all the time, I get that. Grudges can come from anywhere. But if you hit the same country three, four, five or more times in a row then you've earned a few missiles/ABs/BRs and your reset should be ruined. Because you're an idiot. So there's another challenge for you: Develop a policy that avoids creating problems rather than a policy that protects weak and unprepared game-play.

Are suisiders the problem? No, you just forgot the Golden Rule. Get over yourselves, accept a challenge (at least once in a while) and leave the suisiders that you created alone. The odds are already more than enough in the favor of the netters.

You're preaching to the wrong guy. I couldn't give two fluffs about my country. I spend about 3 minutes a day playing my country and don't land grab.

suiciding is not the problem Helmet. The big boys club can not control everything!!!

Good one.

I already said suiciding is not a huge issue. Thank you Captain Obvious! Looking forward to more of your brilliant observations on my "retarted" thread.

I'd say all attacks need to be weakened.

-In wars countries are killed far to easily.
-Suiciders are able to do far too much damage.

Like I've mentioned to a few people... If we're trying to increase the community, retain players, and such we have to do something about that.

Imagine your Mother playing her Farmville, only to be unable to log in for 2 minutes in a entire day. She returns to see her farm destroyed, pigs and cows all murdered, and bushels burned.

She wouldn't keep playing.

But that's what happens here, since you can have four people together kill a country in under 2 minutes.

Hell, you can have a single person kill another country as that KSF suicider proved against Mr.Snow.

Making kills more difficult and attacks smaller it would change war dynamics and make them more exciting.

*grin* PDM's AB war strategy may end up being the most effective attack :)

well maybe not 100%, but 95% accuracy - ending turn count plus 100 = restart land. it works 100% of the time, and i say 95% cause it could happen that a country is killed with the same amount of turns played restart the same day. i have 20 or so marked in ffa just waiting for them to grow into range lol

it is super easy when there isn't any wars going on too. like here...


kabooom 792 - restart

Woo Woo Woo (#789)
Dont stop me now (#788)
MD Forever (#786)
BioHazzard from XI (#785)
JimsEmpire123 (#767)
yoohoo (#764)
You must enter a name (#762)
owl (#754)
big boyz (#726)
Odens lover (#725)
Call Me Mr Btches (#721)
Tsunami earth empires (#671)


your suciders are in this bunch... some may be innocent restarts killed by the sucider, so just see if it tags up.

took 5 min max and went to the start of the set

now if you have the last op of the sucider just match up the starting land to turns played +100

*assuming they already restarted

Helmet, I mostly agree with your ideas.

I've advocated many of them for a long time,

However, you, my friend are wrong in one area.

This is a time and place to hide countries in a war.


A few resets ago when TIE and N?M fought Tie started with a 50% country advantage, but Monsters started with a N/W country build advantage.

After a while all TIE could do was kill restarts....but they did such a good job of it we were barely able to log 1 kill on some days...allowing TIE to start growing again....

By hiding our restarts and sending them massive FA, we were able to get them big enough before they tagged up that TIE couldn't kill them. That strategic decision was the final one in winning the war. It broke the stale mate, of more countries vs better countries

I fully realize larger tags amy not nead to hide countries,
but a well built smaller tag against a slughtly larger tag, this is a good option.


My proposal alternative would be,
Once a country has been killed off, it isn't required to retag up for X amount of time...
it wouldn't be hard to code that in the way account are now, and in the case of a server war leaves plenty of room to hide untagged countries. for a few extra days.

i wonder about allowing name changes but providing no or reduced bonuses if you do that

so you can take your 100 csites and 1k free acres and have the same name or a different name and only get half or none of that

since suiciders might be able to repeatedly suicide very quickly at the end of the reset now

id prefer to let people be untagged but restrict their grabbing heavily, perhaps to only people that have hit them recently

otherwise someone who got detagged couldnt play turns for example