• We are looking for you!
    Always wanted to join our Supporting Team? We are looking for enthusiastic moderators!
    Take a look at our recruitement page for more information and how you can apply:
    Apply

Plundering rationale

Yugi the 7empest

Active Member
As a relatively new player, I'm struck with how completely off balance the plundering system is. Attacking another player for quest purposes is understandable, but plundering? There simply is no way that a player can avoid losing resources if they are put in a hood with players literally millions of points ahead of them. Even the most novice game player can agree with that.

So what then could Inno's rationale possibly be to continue with such a broken system? Is it that difficult to ensure that hood members are all within certain point parameters?
 

Agent327

Well-Known Member
So what then could Inno's rationale possibly be to continue with such a broken system? Is it that difficult to ensure that hood members are all within certain point parameters?

So that IA players can end up in hoods with Future players and we have the same discussion again?

This discussion is about the oldest in the game. It has more repeats than any other. Read all the others if you want to understand why it is as it is.
 

Yugi the 7empest

Active Member
So that IA players can end up in hoods with Future players and we have the same discussion again?

This discussion is about the oldest in the game. It has more repeats than any other. Read all the others if you want to understand why it is as it is.
If it's the oldest discussion in the game and most would agree that it's broke, remove plundering. Problem solved.
 

-Sebastian-

Active Member
I don't think that's going to happen any time soon. In the meantime, here are some temporary ways to reduce the problem.
  • Put up a good defensive army, and maybe change it after each attack so they don't know what units to use.
  • Attack them back, and manual fight it, and figure out how to get through their defense (if you can).
  • If you're not getting enough aids every day, try adding more friends, and friends who aid more. If your guild members don't aid, ask them, or find a new guild. Try aiding your other neighbors to see who aids back. Reduce the number of cultural buildings and decorations. Use longer production cycles.
  • And last but most important, put as many of your buildings on 24-hour productions as possible, sync them up so they all finish at the same time, and collect on time.
 

Agent327

Well-Known Member
If it's the oldest discussion in the game and most would agree that it's broke, remove plundering. Problem solved.

Most don't agree it is broke. Only few see it as a problem, so there is nothing to solve. Inno has already stated it is a game feature that will not be removed, so discussing it is a never ending story.

Use the tools available so you don't get plundered. Problem solved.
 

Emberguard

Well-Known Member
If it's the oldest discussion in the game and most would agree that it's broke, remove plundering. Problem solved.
That would be even more broke. A third of the games GBs have a impact or interact with plundering / attacking neighbours in some way. Many buildings in the game give defending army bonuses for the purpose of defending your city. Removing plundering would effect entire cities instead of a single production at a time.

There simply is no way that a player can avoid losing resources if they are put in a hood with players literally millions of points ahead of them. Even the most novice game player can agree with that.
Plunderer can only take a single finished (not plunderproof) production per successful attack. They can only attack once per 24 hrs

Plunderproof buildings:
- Anything motivated
- Anything that appears as "All Ages" when in your inventory. Once placed these buildings will automatically upgrade to your current age/era
- Great Buildings, Town Hall, Military Buildings (from your technology tree)
- Crows Nest and Statue of Honor
- Disconnected buildings (usually terrible idea for avoiding plunder as then it also doesn't produce anything but it's a mechanic so I'm mentioning it)
 

Lady Gato

Well-Known Member
Tip toeing in -- you don't say what building it is that keeps getting plundered . . . can it be motivated? If not - the last most drastic step you could take is to take away it's road access. So that it doesn't produce - if you are getting hit every single day at that resource that would solve the problem until you perhaps find another building to replace that one. However, if you are getting hit every other day and you've tried the other things that other people have suggested, then keep the resource going for your benefit and find another building that can be protected to switch out with that one. And grow bigger with lots of defense add ons from event buildings and GBs (but be sure that it aids the army in your city - some of the things that say defense only applies to your attacking army's defense).
 

Plunder Queen

Active Member
Plundering is a huge part of the game. Eventually you will stop getting plundered. I had one person in EMA that plundered me daily, I wanted to message him but I didn’t want to give him the satisfaction. I got my three main military buildings to 10, collected on time, threw up a shield and waited for the two week neighborhood change. Now I’m the one plundering and I can’t say I would enjoy the game as much if there wasn’t plundering.
 
Last edited:

DevaCat

Well-Known Member
As a relatively new player, I'm struck with how completely off balance the plundering system is. Attacking another player for quest purposes is understandable, but plundering? There simply is no way that a player can avoid losing resources if they are put in a hood with players literally millions of points ahead of them. Even the most novice game player can agree with that.

So what then could Inno's rationale possibly be to continue with such a broken system? Is it that difficult to ensure that hood members are all within certain point parameters?
Nothing is broken.

The real question is: why is a player being put in a neighborhood with others who are literally millions of points ahead. The answer is that some novices age up far beyond their capabilities. Racing through tech and aging up quickly before a city is strong enough to compete is certainly a strategy, but it's a poor one. Your neighborhood is determined by your age/era, a system which is fair to all involved.

If you don't like being plundered, don't put yourself in the position to be plundered. Nothing broken that needs fixing.
 

Mustapha00

Well-Known Member
Most don't agree it is broke. Only few see it as a problem, so there is nothing to solve. Inno has already stated it is a game feature that will not be removed, so discussing it is a never ending story.

Use the tools available so you don't get plundered. Problem solved.

Disagree.

The most vocal defenders of the current system do not agree that the Plundering system is broke, but then they wouldn't.
 

Nicholas002

Well-Known Member
Fun solution to that part would be to force players to move on after a certain time.
After they implement this "fun solution", what will be their next "fun solution"? Forcing all players to build a tiki totem exactly 5 squares away from their town hall on the 2nd Thursday of every month, after after finishing the 12th encounter of GE, but before starting the 13th, just because someone complains about not having enough happiness?
 

Farfle the smelly

Well-Known Member
I wouldn’t call it broken. I would call it the most historically accurate representation in the game. I attack but I don’t plunder. Not yet in my game, anyway, because I don’t need to nor does it jive with my play style. I don’t mind it, but I can sympathize with those that are frustrated. And to that I say: slooooooow down your game, focus on your city’s integrity, and it shouldn’t even make a dent.
 

DevaCat

Well-Known Member
That is one part of the answer. The other part is that there are dedicated campers in the game. Fun solution to that part would be to force players to move on after a certain time.
We know your personal opinion is that people should play the game, that is, continue to age up and not camp. Dedicated campers can be a problem, but not an insurmountable one as the op suggests -- with a little effort several means to deal with that problem can be found.

While it might be fun to force players to move on, who decides who, when, and how players get forced to do something they may not wish to do, especially when what they are doing is within the rules of the game? I'm not defending campers, just seeing some issues with the suggestion. What's the difference between staying in an age long enough to strengthen a city and get levels on some GBs, and a long term big fish who has grown roots and revels in tormenting foolish novices? Is there some magical number of rps that can reliably determine who can stay and who should move on?

Beyond all that, why should any player be forced to move on -- age up -- simply because a snowflake wanted to move up without first doing the work, and now wants to complain about it?
 

Plunder Queen

Active Member
We know your personal opinion is that people should play the game, that is, continue to age up and not camp. Dedicated campers can be a problem, but not an insurmountable one as the op suggests -- with a little effort several means to deal with that problem can be found.

While it might be fun to force players to move on, who decides who, when, and how players get forced to do something they may not wish to do, especially when what they are doing is within the rules of the game? I'm not defending campers, just seeing some issues with the suggestion. What's the difference between staying in an age long enough to strengthen a city and get levels on some GBs, and a long term big fish who has grown roots and revels in tormenting foolish novices? Is there some magical number of rps that can reliably determine who can stay and who should move on?

Beyond all that, why should any player be forced to move on -- age up -- simply because a snowflake wanted to move up without first doing the work, and now wants to complain about it?
Agree fully. I’m in no rush to age up, in fact I may take too long to age up. Once I’m in colonial I’m sitting for at least six months. I’m not rushing to catch up to people who have been playing for years before me. LMA is okay, nothing special here, I like the two reoccurring quests but I am ready to camp for awhile in CA. I’m not going to make the game harder for myself because I’m a big fish in a small pond. Not sure how long people honestly camp in LMA for. Some people like certain eras and that’s okay with me.
 
Top