• 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

Still being constantly attacked and plundered by people with points thousands ahead

DeletedUser17558

Nonsense. They way you play these games says a LOT about the kind of person you are. Plundering and War have nothing to do with one another. How you treat your enemy after the battle has nothing to do with the battle or its tactics. My general take is a rabid plunderer would also be one of those apt to be a looter in time of Civil unrest.


I take offense at this comment. I consider myself a sheepdog and not a sheep. If you want to judge people in real life on how they play a game, then feel free, but you will be wrong more often than you are right. I, like many, use games as an escape. By reading your posts it seems like you are a pretty jaded person that seems to see the bad in others. I prefer not to live with that mentality.


The neighborhood problem affects a very small portion of the players in this game. I agree that it is a problem, but not a significant problem. 3-4 ages in difference is fine. And I have seen players of a lower age with a ton of points and able to beat players that are an age or more higher. Points and ages don't tell the whole story. ALL of us, except for the very few who started any given world, have been at the bottom of the hood at some point. Play long enough and with enough patience and foresight, and you can rise above most other players. People need to quit playing the victim. Just because someone is at the bottom of a particular hood doesn't mean they are the victim of an unbalanced hood system.
 

DeletedUser10415

Nonsense. They way you play these games says a LOT about the kind of person you are. Plundering and War have nothing to do with one another. How you treat your enemy after the battle has nothing to do with the battle or its tactics. My general take is a rabid plunderer would also be one of those apt to be a looter in time of Civil unrest.

Again, this thread is not about the act of plunder. They put the feature in the game to allow people to play the role of classless jerk if they wanted to, and it does add that "villian" aspect to the game.

Well what about me, then? I'm all about class. I encourage civil society in my neighborhood and only plunder those who're not interested in participating in it. Which usually turns out to be about half of any given 'hood. The other half would have nothing but nice things to say about me. Oh, they might grumble a bit when I attack and plunder them for the odd times they've neglected to hold up their end of our mutual aid agreement, but nearly 100% of the time they recognize and correct their error shortly thereafter.
 

DeletedUser10517

Nonsense. They way you play these games says a LOT about the kind of person you are. Plundering and War have nothing to do with one another. How you treat your enemy after the battle has nothing to do with the battle or its tactics. My general take is a rabid plunderer would also be one of those apt to be a looter in time of Civil unrest.

Again, this thread is not about the act of plunder. They put the feature in the game to allow people to play the role of classless jerk if they wanted to, and it does add that "villian" aspect to the game.

The real problem is the insanely unballance neighborhoods. That is a SERIOUS design flaw. Every player in the game, should be able to lay at least some substantial cost on any attacker, so long as they took all the prescribed actions to defend themselves. But when you can have 2 dozen watchfires, a monastary, and a level 7 Deal and 7 St. Basil and you still only inflict two pips damage on an attacker, then that is a SERIOUSLY BROKEN game facet.

How offensive can you be?
I occasionally plunder...not so much these days.....but certainly have done to a large extent in past days......and there is no way on Earth I would steal from anyone or loot during civil unrest.

Funnily enough, when I played PvP on Wow, and beat up all the unsuspecting younger players, I never once considered beating up old ladies in real life, or ambushing children and stealing their candy bars either.

What poppycock and nonsense you come out with!

This game has many facets.....and one of the facets is plundering your neighbours after an attack, which is something that was often done in times gone by. Was it fair? No. Was it right.....not a chance. But did it occur......yes it did.
So its there to mimic what sometimes happened.

Now not everyone wants to Plunder. Many people like to play nice because, like you, they have this strange idea that it is somehow 'stealing' and 'doing wrong'. It is neither of those things.

What it does do is teach people the value of what they produce and gives them an incentive to protect what they have......it gives people a reason to think of something else other than 'Lets all build pretty towns and collect stuff'. Isnt that what farm ville is for?

The hoods are the way they are for a reason.......and that is to give variety and introduce new challenges.
It would be incredibly boring to have all hoods filled with exactly the same age of people......where is the challenge in that? Where is the need for strategic thinking and planning? Where are the opportunities for old and young alike?

At the end of the day, 'unbalanced' hoods dont affect you in any way......the only thing that affects you is Plundering.
 

Volodya

Well-Known Member
Well what about me, then? I'm all about class. I encourage civil society in my neighborhood and only plunder those who're not interested in participating in it. Which usually turns out to be about half of any given 'hood. The other half would have nothing but nice things to say about me. Oh, they might grumble a bit when I attack and plunder them for the odd times they've neglected to hold up their end of our mutual aid agreement, but nearly 100% of the time they recognize and correct their error shortly thereafter.

You didn't ask me, but I'll answer anyway: your approach is completely classy. No one could ask for more. If your neighbors can't be bothered to aid you in return, they deserve whatever you give them and probably worse.
 

DeletedUser10076

Nonsense. They way you play these games says a LOT about the kind of person you are. Plundering and War have nothing to do with one another. How you treat your enemy after the battle has nothing to do with the battle or its tactics. My general take is a rabid plunderer would also be one of those apt to be a looter in time of Civil unrest.

Again, this thread is not about the act of plunder. They put the feature in the game to allow people to play the role of classless jerk if they wanted to, and it does add that "villian" aspect to the game.

The real problem is the insanely unballance neighborhoods. That is a SERIOUS design flaw. Every player in the game, should be able to lay at least some substantial cost on any attacker, so long as they took all the prescribed actions to defend themselves. But when you can have 2 dozen watchfires, a monastary, and a level 7 Deal and 7 St. Basil and you still only inflict two pips damage on an attacker, then that is a SERIOUSLY BROKEN game facet.


I have reported this post and encourage all others do the same. I will say what i have to say then I will put you on my ignore list.

I am avid plunder, I spent six years in the Navy. In real-life i service my community well through church functions, and in more than one occasion have stopped my fellow students at college from doing unbelievable stupid things. Heavy drug use, typical-liberal brain washing, etc.

Also during the Aurora movie shooting which i had the misfortune of being there, I helped carry wounded out, repeatedly when back into 8 and 9 to clear them out. Never once did occur to me to take advantage of the situation. Some horrible disgusting people were already talking about a refund moment after in the parking lot. Worst people repeatedly called me and asked for my to join their class action law-suit. MY GUESS is that these are more your type of people.

Good luck in the game, and in life..you are going to need it.
 

DeletedUser23706

Just because someone is at the bottom of a particular hood doesn't mean they are the victim of an unbalanced hood system.

Duh....that is the very definition of a design flaw. If you are at the bottom of a neighborhood where the #1 guy is HMA or even LMA and you are EMA, then that's a manageable situation. If the #1 guy is Modern or Post Modern, it's a bug, and very BAD bug. This kind of situation is should be impossible.

And this is just a subset of a larger design flaw, the fact that there is no top boundary limit of any kind around any facet of the game. At some point, you've won the game. If you have 100,000,000+ points, been at Tomorrow for six months, finished the Tech Tree, have 200 watchfires, a Level 43 Alcatraz, 120 Shrines of Knowledge, At 150% attack bonus.....you can take half of any GvG age map all by yourself...I think you are done...congrats, you won. Time to move on to another game....
 

DeletedUser8796

The players with bunches of watch fires and high gb's and strong armies and a massive attack boost? how do you think they got it? THEY WORKED FOR IT OR THEY PAID FOR IT; THE PLAYERS WHO DO SPEND $$$ ON THIS GAME PAY FOR THE PLAYERS THAT DON'T. These watch fires often used in examples i have over 100 BUT i worked for them and saved them and got only them for as long as ive played the game <<< YEARS so it kinda annoys me when its used as a reference to being unfair BC no it isn't unfair i was here 5x as long as you i saved all of those with my time effort and dedication and morons that are a few months into the game complain BC its " unfair" Seriously!!! this isn't grade school someone will have better toys than you if you put little to no effort into getting those toys and they do. The gap only grows! so if i keep getting watch fires and i will! and you don't yes its uneven but its YOUR fault BC you are behind not my fault BC you didn't get watch fires but instead got some stupid house you sold a week after the event.

sorry for the rant but seriously saying its " unfair" and referencing thier gb;s and event building and watch fires is NOT a bases to make it unfair that player that has those can have a city 4 eras below yours and have been here for 3 years.

Just so you know unfair is something like this:
you get your LMA city put into a CE/ TE neighborhood
You have 1 TE player randomly added in your HMA neighborhood for some reason

stuff like that^ not " he has more event buildings and better GB;'s"
 

DeletedUser23706

How offensive can you be?
I occasionally plunder...not so much these days.....but certainly have done to a large extent in past days......and there is no way on Earth I would steal from anyone or loot during civil unrest.

Funnily enough, when I played PvP on Wow, and beat up all the unsuspecting younger players, I never once considered beating up old ladies in real life, or ambushing children and stealing their candy bars either.

What poppycock and nonsense you come out with!

This game has many facets.....and one of the facets is plundering your neighbours after an attack, which is something that was often done in times gone by. Was it fair? No. Was it right.....not a chance. But did it occur......yes it did.
So its there to mimic what sometimes happened.

Now not everyone wants to Plunder. Many people like to play nice because, like you, they have this strange idea that it is somehow 'stealing' and 'doing wrong'. It is neither of those things.

What it does do is teach people the value of what they produce and gives them an incentive to protect what they have......it gives people a reason to think of something else other than 'Lets all build pretty towns and collect stuff'. Isn't that what farm ville is for?

The hoods are the way they are for a reason.......and that is to give variety and introduce new challenges.
It would be incredibly boring to have all hoods filled with exactly the same age of people......where is the challenge in that? Where is the need for strategic thinking and planning? Where are the opportunities for old and young alike?

At the end of the day, 'unbalanced' hoods don't affect you in any way......the only thing that affects you is Plundering.

Yes plundering is a key facet of the game and adds a lot of depth to it that mimics a lot of historical behavior. A game like this is pretty boring withot the villains, which is the role of the rabid plunderer. I would never advocate getting rid of it. With that said, I still consider a classless act and think that those that derive a measure of satisfaction in doing it, says a lot about their personal character. In most mature guilds, we have all sorts of mechanisms to either limit plundering and to deal with players getting plundered, and in virtually every case, the outside plunderer is considered to be a lout and best dealt with by getting your guild power players that happen to be in the same hood, to relentlessly respond in kind or, if they are in a guild you are allied with, get the guild leadership to stop it, or if not, then mercilessly attack that player's guild up and down the map until they stop. In any case, it is universally viewed with a very NEGATIVE connotation.

As for the unbalance hood you are simplyy wrong, period. It does affect those at the bottom of these ridiculously unbalanced groupings. It only affects a small number of people at any given time, but eventually affects all of us at one time or another. The neighborhoods do not need to be perfectly balanced, but they don't need to be grossly imballanced, either. The answer, as ALWAYS is the case, is somewhere in the middle.

- - - Updated - - -

The players with bunches of watch fires and high gb's and strong armies and a massive attack boost? how do you think they got it? THEY WORKED FOR IT OR THEY PAID FOR IT; THE PLAYERS WHO DO SPEND $$$ ON THIS GAME PAY FOR THE PLAYERS THAT DON'T. These watch fires often used in examples i have over 100 BUT i worked for them and saved them and got only them for as long as ive played the game <<< YEARS so it kinda annoys me when its used as a reference to being unfair BC no it isn't unfair i was here 5x as long as you i saved all of those with my time effort and dedication and morons that are a few months into the game complain BC its " unfair" Seriously!!! this isn't grade school someone will have better toys than you if you put little to no effort into getting those toys and they do. The gap only grows! so if i keep getting watch fires and i will! and you don't yes its uneven but its YOUR fault BC you are behind not my fault BC you didn't get watch fires but instead got some stupid house you sold a week after the event.

sorry for the rant but seriously saying its " unfair" and referencing thier gb;s and event building and watch fires is NOT a bases to make it unfair that player that has those can have a city 4 eras below yours and have been here for 3 years.

Just so you know unfair is something like this:
you get your LMA city put into a CE/ TE neighborhood
You have 1 TE player randomly added in your HMA neighborhood for some reason

stuff like that^ not " he has more event buildings and better GB;'s"

My point is, at some point, you've won....what's the point if you are now invincible. Try attacking oooTooo on G.... What is the point of even playing? You can't advance anymore. You can't be beaten by anyone. You can drub whoever you attack at will.... The game design has no boundary controls at all. It's not a war game, because at some point the war ends. Gary Grigsby's stuff like War in The Pacific is a war game....not this. This is just civilization with some depth. At some point you become Civilized....game over.
 

DeletedUser17558

Yes plundering is a key facet of the game and adds a lot of depth to it that mimics a lot of historical behavior. A game like this is pretty boring withot the villains, which is the role of the rabid plunderer. I would never advocate getting rid of it. With that said, I still consider a classless act and think that those that derive a measure of satisfaction in doing it, says a lot about their personal character. In most mature guilds, we have all sorts of mechanisms to either limit plundering and to deal with players getting plundered, and in virtually every case, the outside plunderer is considered to be a lout and best dealt with by getting your guild power players that happen to be in the same hood, to relentlessly respond in kind or, if they are in a guild you are allied with, get the guild leadership to stop it, or if not, then mercilessly attack that player's guild up and down the map until they stop. In any case, it is universally viewed with a very NEGATIVE connotation.

I know I take no satisfaction from plundering, it is a means to an end. I get more goods that way than by producing them myself. It is a pragmatic decision. By calling people who rightfully use this game mechanic villians or louts diminishes YOUR arguments. YOU are biased. YOU view plundering in a negative connotation. Quit assigning so much significance to a game mechanic and stop putting your personal morals on a neutral activity. Don't like it, don't do it, but don't pretend that those who do it are bad people. I promise you I don't pretend that those who don't plunder are good people. They may or may not be, but that is completely and utterly unrelated to whether or not they plunder. Your opinion says more about you than it does about those you judge.
 

DeletedUser23474

How do you plunder?
Sorry but I'm new here, haven't seen the option that allows me to plunder :)
 

DeletedUser8428

How do you plunder?
Sorry but I'm new here, haven't seen the option that allows me to plunder :)

First you have to attack someone's city and defeat them. If you do, you are offered an opportunity to plunder. If there is nothing in their city to plunder at that time, the plunder option will be greyed out. If there is nothing to plunder OR nothing you WANT to plunder, you can leave ... and visit them at any time for the next 24 hours and plunder then. But once the 24 hours is over, you'd have to attack and defeat them again in order to plunder.
 

DeletedUser23706

I know I take no satisfaction from plundering, it is a means to an end. I get more goods that way than by producing them myself. It is a pragmatic decision. By calling people who rightfully use this game mechanic villians or louts diminishes YOUR arguments. YOU are biased. YOU view plundering in a negative connotation. Quit assigning so much significance to a game mechanic and stop putting your personal morals on a neutral activity. Don't like it, don't do it, but don't pretend that those who do it are bad people. I promise you I don't pretend that those who don't plunder are good people. They may or may not be, but that is completely and utterly unrelated to whether or not they plunder. Your opinion says more about you than it does about those you judge.

The plunder feature in the game attempts to mimic a common behavior that was pretty much the norm in history from antiquity through the early middle ages. But by today's standard, is considered barbaric. If you are a rabid plunderer, one who plunders their neighbors whether or not they aid you, you are by definition immitating a barbaric behavior by today's standards of civil society. If that offends you or anyone else, tough, grow a skin. That's what the plunderers general response to those are who shun the act, so tit-for-tat. I stand by my opinion that those to engage in the activity to the extreme are simply classless lout and are playing the role of the game's villians. I would neveer advocate the game getting rid of the feature...we need our jerks and villians to add depth to the game.

But again, for th upteenth time, this thread is about grossly imbalanced neighborhoods, not the act of plunder.
 

DeletedUser9732

I stand by my opinion that those to engage in the activity to the extreme are simply classless lout and are playing the role of the game's villians. I would neveer advocate the game getting rid of the feature...we need our jerks and villians to add depth to the game.

Perhaps so, but only in the confines of the game. You can't extend that to making assumptions about the player's behavior outside the game. It is just a game after all.

But again, for th upteenth time, this thread is about grossly imbalanced neighborhoods, not the act of plunder.

Except that plundering is explicitly mentioned in the title/first post of the thread, and is pretty well tied to the unbalanced hood problem. After all, there'd be much fewer complaints if it was only getting attacked, not losing so much to so many people.
 

Algona

Well-Known Member
"The plunder feature in the game attempts to mimic a common behavior that was pretty much the norm in history from antiquity through the early middle ages."

Well, uhhh, how to phrase this delicately.

You're wrong.

Seizing enemy assets is a valid and currently used military tactic. It would be criminal negligence for a military commander to not seize and use assets captured during a military campaign.

(Gee, General, we just captured a bunch of enemy fuel, what should we do with it? And all these bullets?)

Campaigns throughout the last few hundreds years consistently revolve around the attempts to deny the enemy access to key materials.

If you mean plunder as in the wanton sacking, pillage, raping, and destruction of a city, well, FoE avoids that entirely. You can't do anything in FOE to damage another players city.
 

DeletedUser17558

If you are a rabid plunderer, one who plunders their neighbors whether or not they aid you, you are by definition immitating(sic) a barbaric behavior by today's standards of civil society.

This is the only thing in your last post that is intelligently stated. Yes, I am imitating a barbaric behavior. I am not advocating that behavior in real life, and it is a stretch by even the flimsiest logic to assert that just because I am imitating a barbaric behavior that I advocate or practice that behavior in real life. But you continue to insist that just because you play the same person in the game that you do in real life that obviously everyone else must as well. You are wrong. And to continue to vilify innocent people because they "imitate" a behavior you find abhorrent is wrong as well. If I was you I would feel bad about having such a close-minded and pessimistic outlook in life.
 

Mustapha00

Well-Known Member
To drag this discussion, kicking and screaming at every step, back on (what I think was the) topic:
Plundering isn't- or, at least, shouldn't be- the real issue here. Innogames would not have included the option among the features the game offers if they did not intend for it to be at least available.
Now, that said, I'm thinking the objection here is that a player has very little chance to defend himself militarily against someone several Ages ahead of them in the game. Spearmen just aren't going to fare well against tanks. That being the case, it does make sense to take whatever steps are possible to ensure that neighborhoods have only a reasonable- I'd say + or - one Age is reasonable- Era span. For all I know, maybe they are doing all they can right now and the only hope for lower-Age players is to hope to move to another 'hood via automatic merger. With a +/- one Age span, you'd have at least somewhat of a chance to defend yourself, and the match would become one more of tactics than technological advantage.
 

DeletedUser10415

I'm thinking the objection here is that a player has very little chance to defend himself militarily against someone several Ages ahead of them in the game. Spearmen just aren't going to fare well against tanks.

If a player had tanks, they wouldn't fare well against jaegers, or even great sword warriors and a bunch of rogues, if the attacker's bonuses are good. Fact of the matter is that no defense is going to be adequate ever against an attacker that means business. The only difference between a bronze age player being stuck in a 'hood with other bronze age players and being stuck in a 'hood with contemporary era players is in the latter 'hood, the bronze age player doesn't stand a chance of attacking anyone. All defences except perhaps the heavily leveled Deal/St. Basils + hundreds of watchfires are fairly easy to beat. If people would just collect on time, there'd be little to boo-hoo about.
 

DeletedUser10517

Limiting Hoods to just one or two eras would be dire......boring boring boring.

Collect goods on time, and noone needs to bother with defences........attacks dont hurt you or your town

- - - Updated - - -

The plunder feature in the game attempts to mimic a common behavior that was pretty much the norm in history from antiquity through the early middle ages. But by today's standard, is considered barbaric. If you are a rabid plunderer, one who plunders their neighbors whether or not they aid you, you are by definition immitating a barbaric behavior by today's standards of civil society. If that offends you or anyone else, tough, grow a skin. That's what the plunderers general response to those are who shun the act, so tit-for-tat. I stand by my opinion that those to engage in the activity to the extreme are simply classless lout and are playing the role of the game's villians. I would neveer advocate the game getting rid of the feature...we need our jerks and villians to add depth to the game.

But again, for th upteenth time, this thread is about grossly imbalanced neighborhoods, not the act of plunder.

More nonsense
It happens in modern times too.

Army against army in real life, WILL result in the taking of assets. Do you honestly believe that one army, stumbling across the enemies stockpile of fresh water, is going to just leave it there??? Course they wont. They will take it........or at least destroy it.

When you attack someone on this game, your attacking another army that has been placed to defend the town and the people. Taking goods will stop the army from getting stronger next time. (At least in theory)

And I can guarantee this is very much a used tactic in modern times too.
 

Volodya

Well-Known Member
I am not telling you you can't use a particular strategy, but Inno WANTS you to attack and plunder other players. It is a war game with city building tossed in. Even the prompts on the loading screen tell you that you should be attacking and plundering.

The prompts on the loading screen also explicitly describe plundering as "stealing," yet plunderers seem to be offended if they're described as "thieves." Plunderers in general seem remarkably thin-skinned, quick to take offense at the tiniest imagined slight. Poor dears. Inno also wants players to use this discussion board--presumably that's why they offer it--yet you and your comrades seem to feel that posts that cast you in an unflattering light are out of bounds. Why is that? If those posts don't violate the message rules, they ALSO are part of playing the game the way Inno intends. Most of us have learned that wanting to have your cake and eat it too isn't a viable life strategy.

For the record, none of this is about me. I can count on both hands--with fingers left over--the number of times I've been successfully plundered since I began playing the game. I put up the strongest army I can; I'll take my chances with that and my +364 defense bonus. If someone can attack me and plunder me, good for them; I'll get 'em next time or the time after that. I have no issue with plundering--as long as both players have agreed, at least tacitly, by saying nothing about it, that that is how they want to play the game. You loseme though when you boast of disregarding requests to stop plundering. You say that your style of playing doesn't reflect the person you are in real life. You're wrong about that; regardless of how ardently you try to deny it, your behavior in this game demonstrates an empathy-deficiency in real life... because, whether you "approve" of it or not, whether or not you think it's silly or childish, you are genuinely upsetting people, also in real life, and you don't care.
 

DeletedUser8428

Sorry, Volodya but I don't follow. "as long as both players have agreed, at least tacitly, by saying nothing about it, that that is how they want to play the game" There are hundreds of games - board games, card games - where different strategies may be used to win, not all players use those strategies and the point is to win, which certainly implies that someone else loses. And although the loser is free to be ticked off about losing, as long as the strategy itself is not against the rules ... so I'm don't really understand your comment. Plunder is not against the rules, it's encouraged by the game developer.

So your complaint is about the attitude of the player?

While it may not be the attitude of polite society, role-playing games - online or otherwise - are often not polite. When I was little, playing Cowboys and Indians I loved being an Indian because I loved pretending I was riding a horse and scalping people. I can assure you, in RL I do not run around scalping people or screaming at the top of my lungs. I'm actually known for excellence in customer service.

There is a long standing argument about the value of role-playing, but no conclusive evidence that 'trying on' other behaviors is related to acting out in RL.

Oh, and I'm not a player who plunders.
 
Top