Ending Powerblocks :(

[Tombi]

Bah...

This should have happened a bit earlier, but meh, better ate than never.

Why not just add a paragraph to the EULA:

Any alliance which is in #1 spot more that 10 days running, or which is X times larger than the median of the top 10 alliances runs a cumulative risk of getting attacked by the Government in an anti-trust crack down.

This would:
a) make it very risky to try an pull ahead and/or set up a powerblock.
b) make the round more interesting for the top allies, as they would get action even if no resistance shows up.

To successfully pull through a win then would mean a lot more jockeying for position, making sure other allies would pull ahead for a it, and then killing them off etc.

Note: I'm not talking undefendable rapeage here, just the risk of getting a well set up bashing from government troops, which naturally can't be countered by any "wing-allies".

MAYBE it would be a bit unfair to do so now, but hey, Azzer is god after all...

Still not sure about the whole "oh but we are friends, this was set ut before round" etc, as arguments for not pulling a nasty backstab when least expected. It's even sweeter backstabbing and killing an ally which see you as no threat what so ever. But I'm just evil I guess.

Good suggestion but why not make it even simpler like the Government will crack down without warning on racketeering alliances or something similar to that?

 

[fred]

Yes the game is advertised as 'free' because it is free, it requires no money whatsoever to play the game but there are things to spend money on to somewhat improve your gameplay, and that would be one of the stupidest suggestions ever removing p-units and gamecash

/me sighs
i didn't say remove them
just don't buy them ....

So your view is that if you don't want to buy BCs, then don't? Fair comment.
Unfortunatly that's the problem, people's lacking motivation to spend money on this business. How do we solve the issues that lower motivation, in this instance powerblocking.

Then re-read everyone's posts attempting to try and discuss a feasable option to do so.

well after something like 6 years playing this game here is my "2 cents" worth.

a) Bring back A-NAPs - but only when your alliance has multiple incomings from 2 or more alliances. One A-NAP only though.
b) Balance the routes - I had most kills with SAs one round .. now they 'suck'.
c) Alliances to be 12 members.
d) Reduce +2ETA attacks to 5% of land and +1ETA to 10%. Repeated attacks within 1 day to be reduced by 50%.
e) Alliances being 'massed' get bonus of 20% damage against attackers. Like where there is rank 10 v rank 200. Small alliance members then have a chance to defend.

 

[cb1202]

Bah...

This should have happened a bit earlier, but meh, better ate than never.

Why not just add a paragraph to the EULA:

Any alliance which is in #1 spot more that 10 days running, or which is X times larger than the median of the top 10 alliances runs a cumulative risk of getting attacked by the Government in an anti-trust crack down.

This would:
a) make it very risky to try an pull ahead and/or set up a powerblock.
b) make the round more interesting for the top allies, as they would get action even if no resistance shows up.

To successfully pull through a win then would mean a lot more jockeying for position, making sure other allies would pull ahead for a it, and then killing them off etc.

Note: I'm not talking undefendable rapeage here, just the risk of getting a well set up bashing from government troops, which naturally can't be countered by any "wing-allies".

MAYBE it would be a bit unfair to do so now, but hey, Azzer is god after all...

Still not sure about the whole "oh but we are friends, this was set ut before round" etc, as arguments for not pulling a nasty backstab when least expected. It's even sweeter backstabbing and killing an ally which see you as no threat what so ever. But I'm just evil I guess.

That was tried before and did not work. The problem isn't one alliance winning, it is the 3 alliances teaming up to win. Under the guidelines u suggested then a powerblock would actually benefit from being in the powerblock

 

[tobapopalos]

What would be funny is if Azzer didn't publish a portal this round out of spite , just so we can forget about this god awful excuse of a round.

Two big thumbs up from me.

 

[cb1202]

Yes the game is advertised as 'free' because it is free, it requires no money whatsoever to play the game but there are things to spend money on to somewhat improve your gameplay, and that would be one of the stupidest suggestions ever removing p-units and gamecash

/me sighs
i didn't say remove them
just don't buy them ....

So your view is that if you don't want to buy BCs, then don't? Fair comment.
Unfortunatly that's the problem, people's lacking motivation to spend money on this business. How do we solve the issues that lower motivation, in this instance powerblocking.

Then re-read everyone's posts attempting to try and discuss a feasable option to do so.

well after something like 6 years playing this game here is my "2 cents" worth.

a) Bring back A-NAPs - but only when your alliance has multiple incomings from 2 or more alliances. One A-NAP only though.
b) Balance the routes - I had most kills with SAs one round .. now they 'suck'.
c) Alliances to be 12 members.
d) Reduce +2ETA attacks to 5% of land and +1ETA to 10%. Repeated attacks within 1 day to be reduced by 50%.
e) Alliances being 'massed' get bonus of 20% damage against attackers. Like where there is rank 10 v rank 200. Small alliance members then have a chance to defend.

although completely off topic like all your posts so far. If you look at the guy with most damage he is using SA's so obviously you are doing something wrong.

 

[Azzer]

b) Balance the routes - I had most kills with SAs one round .. now they 'suck'.

although completely off topic like all your posts so far. If you look at the guy with most damage he is using SA's so obviously you are doing something wrong.

Indeed, the current rank 1 most damaging is in-fact SAs, it didn't take more than 20 seconds of effort to check this

 

[DarkSider]

There's no way an Eula post could cover a powerblock.
As mentioned above rank 6 and 8 can form a powerblock .. what then ?
Or rank 2 and 3 don't attack eachother but don't call themselfs a powerblock .. is it true ?
2 leaders of different alliances share information and once in a while they attack the same wounded alliance for easy land .. powerblock ?
Ranks 2-5 alliances decide to not attack eachother for a few weeks and just botomfeed on other smaller alliances to get strong enough to kill #1 .. powerblock ? What if they do it for 2 days ? 3 days ? 6 days ? 7 and a half ? 1 month ?
I can go on all day

For a powerblock to be so easy to be against eula would need the alliances to say "I'm part of a powerblock" and only then you'd have the grounds to do something about it.
What about diplomacy .. short naps ? longer naps ? It's a waste of time to think of a wording to stop powerblocks.

All you can do is add mechanics against it. Back to my population happiness - Your HQ peasants could have some desires and needs and see there are alliances around you that you pussy having a go at. They want a war once in a while, they want attacking above once in a while if possible, a good defence here and there etc. They start to spread rumours about alliance leadership beeing too soft and not representative for their desire to be known as fearless warriors and spread the rumours to peasants from companies and lower income from the acres

 

[Enrico]

That was tried before and did not work. The problem isn't one alliance winning, it is the 3 alliances teaming up to win. Under the guidelines u suggested then a powerblock would actually benefit from being in the powerblock

How come, the reason they are so successful is that as soon as one of the allies was mobbed the other two would step in and counter. You can't counter the Government.

And right now all 3 wings are worth at least 3 times the median of the top 10, so X=3 would mean that all 3 would risk visits from the government.

Though I still think that if the leaders of rank 2 and 3 allies had any balls what so ever they would kill the rank 1 ally the last week just for ***** and giggles

 

[Gadfly]

b) Balance the routes - I had most kills with SAs one round .. now they 'suck'.

although completely off topic like all your posts so far. If you look at the guy with most damage he is using SA's so obviously you are doing something wrong.

Indeed, the current rank 1 most damaging is in-fact SAs, it didn't take more than 20 seconds of effort to check this

I love my SA's...but, they do tend to get raped by Robo's.

 

[willymchilybily]

faith. I have faith. that next round. next round during the summer holidays. the next 70 days where i have just finished my 4year masters degree i will be kaining the bushtarion.

i have faith that with the right advertising the realisation of the powerblocks negative impact, and with the support of my recreational drug abuse, should all fuel an all out 24/7 bush monster that is me. and no power block will stop my desire to win. to rape and to kill everything i see.

next round every one should try with thiere summer holidays thier free time, there ability to commit high levels of hours when they want to. as most people start this sort of game when at school/college/uni that means there is a large player base that remains in the game that will have enough free time to make the next round fricken awsome. So if your thinking about leaving after coming back and playing a gash round. i emplore you give it one more chance one more round. next round. because next round will be a beast

It could be the best round ive ever played since round 8 or 9 (still my fave) so much poitential all the new feature all the desire to beat these people that have been keeping a power block bashing us down, keeping us pinned down and unable to play.

they will start as our equals 20days from now! and i for one will say F*CK YOU MOTHER F*CKERS this time its willy's time to kill rape and win. this time you will feel my wrath.
whether there is 20 of you 40 of you or 60 of you. I will play hard enough and long enough to be like 20 people i will be a god damn spider monkey.

RAWR

so stop *****ing and start making your allie make your plans. start your scheming. decide your allies, decide your route set up. decide your time zones and cover. decide your enemies, who you would like most to rape. decide your play style. decide how you will play your individual route, start testing things that you would never normally test because you cared about troops and score. suicide cause chaos go mad. go out with a bang. Discover loop holes, discover unit "hidden bonuses" and how to best manipulate them. test different combinations of the early units and learn thier depth. then be ready to hit it hard next round. and ensure you shall never be walked over, never face anihalation by overwhelming forces. ensure you are on top. and defend like its only a game and your friends and allies are welcome to the millions of fictional troops at your disposal. Dominate your enemies. have some fight some spirit some passion. some compassion. and have some fricken fun.

ps fred. if no one bought gamecash or punits where would azzer get the money to pay for the server? lol that comment better not have been serious else maybe you should take a few economics and business lessons

 

[Matthew]

IMO the removal of Psolo's had a lot to do with the introduction of the powerblock. You removed such a dynamic and vast game mechanic which meant that a large group of players had to find an alliance. I can't remember specific figures but by the end of round 4 the playerbase consisted of between 50-70% Psolo's. Once this mechanic was removed A LOT players (many accomplished and skilled) then needed to find an alliance, however, the current situation with regards to frequent active leaders couldn't meet the demands for these players. So this resulted in leaders taking on more players as they had a lot more options.

I am in no way insinuating that this powerblock was deserved. But there is a clear link with the removal of Psolo and then there being 3 wings at varying points in the round.

 

[Enrico]

Hmm, correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't it so back in age 3/4 that the top allies didnt get the ally-bonus when sending defense?

Maybe just add to that, let top ally have +2 and the allies ranked 2-5 have 0 in ally defense modifier.

As soon as an ally starts having zeroed members they tend to be a bit less daunting.

 

[cb1202]

That was tried before and did not work. The problem isn't one alliance winning, it is the 3 alliances teaming up to win. Under the guidelines u suggested then a powerblock would actually benefit from being in the powerblock

How come, the reason they are so successful is that as soon as one of the allies was mobbed the other two would step in and counter. You can't counter the Government.

And right now all 3 wings are worth at least 3 times the median of the top 10, so X=3 would mean that all 3 would risk visits from the government.

Though I still think that if the leaders of rank 2 and 3 allies had any balls what so ever they would kill the rank 1 ally the last week just for ***** and giggles

I dont know if you were playing, but like I said it was tried before. Who wants to play a game where the government punishes you for being successful? It might solve one problem but creates 100 new ones. Something else must be done that punishes only those who powerblock, but not people who earn their win fair and square.

 

[tyedyegoddess]

I've been quite frustrated with powerblocks and winged alliances and bottomfeeding...

I'm an officer in an alliance that strives, tries the best we can, and does things legitimately. We don't wave an alliance that hasn't already waved us, and we quit after we've gotten our land back. We don't tolerate spies and actually kicked and waved someone for joining another alliance then trying to come back by offering their ally list, and we let that ally know. We play legitimately, purchase p-units...

And whenever we get close to top ten, at least 2 alliances wave us continually until we're down again.

Right now I'm under attack from someone in the top 50 rank in the world, because I'm just big enough to hit 30% range for him. Same person hit someone in my alliance earlier today.

TBH, if my p-unit credits hadn't been gifted, I wouldn't have purchased them. I'd rather stay low, and I've seen an unbelievable amount of stock in the philosophy of suiciding your troops so you stay low rank. It's not worth it to try, and wherein previous rounds I've purchased my p-unit and at least once a round purchased game cash, I'm not doing it this round.

The saddest part is this: Our entire alliance got kicked because we *looked* like a multi and hadn't quite understood the rule of using the same computer. However, less than half of us that used to play do now, and the ones that don't were the ones that spent the most money. Those of us who do still play make quite the honest effort, but we realize there's nothing admin can do about it.

Jerks are jerks. They don't care who they're ruining the game for, or they wouldn't be powerblocking and bottomfeeding. They're doing what's fun for them. At least once a day I come across some jerk who is like "I'll keep coming back until they're zeroed and I land"... so there's no point in sending def, not when our entire alliance can muster half of what one person sends at us.

You can do land grab caps for smaller ranges and make allies smaller - I honestly believe both of these would be wonderful moves. I also believe bringing back the fame system would as well, and I do miss being able to see what kind of bounty I'd get on someone. Back about a year and a half ago, my alliance would hunt people with lots of bounty or that weren't on the green end of the law/fame ranking. Maybe instead of trying to deter people from bottomfeeding and such by forcing them not to, you should try making it more advantageous to attack people of higher rank somehow?? Just a thought. Maybe making land grabs specifically relative to someone's range to you, or the same concept with insurance and bounty. Anti-rape works great and prevents solo accounts from really being hit with any effective mob, but if someone's in an alliance (which is supposed to be the preferred way to play) they're fair game. If you can find an allied target 30% your range that was recently zeroed and has 6k land, you're going to get 700 land if they don't get def. And if you're sending huge, allies are afraid to defend it. Hell, get your buddies in too, before they drop too low! But if attacking them meant you'd only get 100 land no matter what and would get a lower insurance rate than if you attacked someone at 45% your range, people would start attacking at 45% their range instead. I know I would.

You can't mandate asshatery. People are inconsiderate jerks, and you can't make people be good people. I learned that when I was 18 trying to be friends with a guy who was only interested in dating me. He never stopped being a jerk and was always inconsiderate to anything that actually mattered to me. There are two types of people in this world - People who care and people who care about themselves. The latter vastly outnumber the former.

 

[atsanjose]

What would be funny is if Azzer didn't publish a portal this round out of spite , just so we can forget about this god awful excuse of a round.

Two big thumbs up from me.

yup, that would be funny

 

[cb1202]

What would be funny is if Azzer didn't publish a portal this round out of spite , just so we can forget about this god awful excuse of a round.

Two big thumbs up from me.

yup, that would be funny

This is an incomplete version of Age 5, I dont think it should count

 

[saint1d]

I'm in the "powerblock". I didnt expect things to turn out this way, it was just supposed to be a bit of fun. I feel bad that it has had such an impact on the game and other players in general, and I am pleased Azzer has spoken out about it.

I'm considering deleting my id, but will speak to the ally later today and come to a decision. I dont really want to leave cos I will get bashed to hell haha

I find the amount of naivity cosidering the powerblock quite incomprhensable. Considering alliance naps have been removed and the majority of alliances in recent rounds have never been napped or at least for no longer than 1/2 weeks ceasefire. How can the current powerblock really have expected anything but a win/stale and boring round. I think maybe a ban rule for those involved in future powerblocks should be implemented. Basically take part in one and your accounts banned for the next round. Amazing that all those people involved in the powerblock are now eating humble pie and claiming they will never be involved again. May i ask if Azzer hadent made this announcement would you still be saying what your claiming in this thread?

Good post !!!!

Same thoughts .. they all say 'sorry' but will do it all again next round ...

Ok then f~@# you, I wont delete my id. I was being genuine, but if thats the sort of response my statement gets then no I wont delete my id, I wont leave the ally. Think what you like, I dont care.

 

[Garrett]

Wow. I feel my intelligence dropping per page in this thread.

The powerblock: "oh i had no idea people were upset"

I point you to the politics subsection of the overall forum. You can't go on and brag and then act all innocent. You are not politicians/members of congress/parliment. The posts from every powerblock person (with the exception of twigley's first and short and to the point post) is utterly retarded, this is fact.

The others wanting 'justice':

No, it should not be rules lawyered into the EULA. Impossible to crack down on. No, portal should not be taken away. And most definitely since azzer posted his ... dissertation? spat-fest with twigley? ... in politics a month ago... nothing should be done in game now this round. 20 days left. All these posts (a couple humourous) are also very retarded. Fact again.

People making sense:

Martin - a blurb extending the definition of mutual attacking. This guy is a genius.

DarkSider - making good points. Some of his ideas are in the weeds, imo. But it's ...and I can't stress this enough for this playerbase... it's substantial items that can be built upon or discussed.

every other post is a gripe/a flame/a troll/an excuse/whiny

 

[dafe]

If enough people think it acceptable to have a EULA against powerblocking, I will seriously consider it. It would have to be clear and concise so that people couldn't abuse the rule by getting people in to trouble who are not powerblocking - eg 5 alliances working together to take down a rank 1 top ally who are only working together as a "resistance", is not the same as 3 allys agreeing to work together permanently. Defining what is a powerblock, and what is not a powerblock, in clear cut manners that cannot be mis-interpreted against innocent people and cannot be "evaded" by naughty/bad people who find a way around the rules, would need to be done, so I'd welcome some feedback on having a stab at writing a clear-cut definition. Also it'd have to be "provable" - eg what if the current powerblock never mentioned eachothers allies anywhere in-game, in-forums, or in IRC - they pretended to be enemies too scared to attack eachother just to evade the rules, while in private (invisible to anyone including admin), they agreed not to attack eachother.

With or without a rule - I will still be working on game mechanics and features to help keep the game interesting when fighting against the odds against large powerblocks etc., and also systems to help limit "bottomfeeding".

i vote for such a rule, resistances are good and needed

 

[Enrico]

No, it should not be rules lawyered into the EULA. Impossible to crack down on.

Again, just the possibility of getting reaction will make most thik twice. (By the same degree, not all speeders on the motorways can be caught and punished, should we then remove all speed limits?)

No, portal should not be taken away.

Agreed, silly idea!

nothing should be done in game now this round. 20 days left.

Why should the amount of time left have any thing to say? I really don't understand? Even if Azzer where to go in and zero all members of TBA (and I'm not saying he should) they would still have plenty of time to rebuild in 20 days.