Solve the damn land problem with bots please.

locket

Member
6176

Aug 22nd 2013, 23:52:27

That or something else. It is disgusting how few possible grab targets are available and perhaps if laf had more land access they would stop trying to be fluffs about landtrading which has nothing to do with them. They could beat the filthy landtraders through their own skill instead of threats.

Look at the DR on untaggeds. Its just stupid. This HUGE lack of land makes the game less fun. You want to retain more people? Find a way to get more sources of land into the game.

It seems to me that you are not going to ever go the Facebook route which is fine. Thats your choice. So we will not likely ever have a bunch more players. So there has to be some other solution to getting land. This is my suggestion.

I put it here because this is an Alliance specific issue, although I am sure it does affect some other servers as well.

locket

Member
6176

Aug 22nd 2013, 23:53:15

Or hell. Go with that suggestion about 2 countries per person but one has to stay untagged. Perhaps weaken certain aspects of the second country so as to stave off rampant suiciders. Or perhaps untagged cant hit tagged countries before they get hit themselves.

Kalick

Member
699

Aug 22nd 2013, 23:59:15

There are 706 countries in 1A, so that means there are 705 potential LG targets. I don't think it is the game developer's responsibility to fix the mess we made with this server's ridiculous politics.

Ershow

Member
178

Aug 23rd 2013, 0:02:21

Yeah I like the 2 country suggestion. The second country should be automatically generated when you create your primary country and should also have certain limitations built in (i.e can't tag/can't do ops on tagged countries/can't do special attacks).

If you don't play your second country then it should just accumulate a certain amount of acres per day.

Sean

Member
66

Aug 23rd 2013, 0:02:48

How about we just automatically grant every player 50k acres, fully built to their choice of strategy with maxed techs so you can go straight into stocking mode.

Call it landtrading light.

Cerberus

Member

EE Patron
3849

Aug 23rd 2013, 0:04:07

Originally posted by Kalick:

Sums it up very nicely, Thank you Kalick. You made the mess with your ridiculous policies and unwillingness to hit anyone who could potentially retal you, thus the game is what it is.

I don't need anger management, people need to stop pissing me off!

locket

Member
6176

Aug 23rd 2013, 0:06:40

Originally posted by Kalick:

Fairly certain you are from MD so perhaps you shouldnt speak about fluffty grabbing politics since you guys I believe do 90% land to land or I would have already tried some grabs with you guys. Stupid policy designed to get wars.

Want to talk about 705 targets? Well perhaps if Laf and Sof didnt outlaw people from hitting eachother more often than they can tolerate that would be more of an option. I could go on but why bother?

Bottomfeeding is one netting option and I believe it needs to be opened up a bit. Grabs between alliances are political but having no untaggeds has to fall on the developers a bit too. They dont believe their game is up to mass promotion and fair enough. But they should do something else to help out instead.

Newworld

Member
386

Aug 23rd 2013, 0:14:26

*Pies locket*

Explore button

;P

pew pew pew

locket

Member
6176

Aug 23rd 2013, 0:15:13

You explore button! :P I like to have options!

Kalick

Member
699

Aug 23rd 2013, 0:32:59

Originally posted by locket:

Originally posted by Kalick:

Don't be a fluff. It seems like you just want to fight. I agree with you that the policies of all clans are ridiculous.

locket

Member
6176

Aug 23rd 2013, 1:00:25

I dont just wish to fight. I just dont want people from clans with some of the worst retal policies acting like they are innocent in anything.

I proposed a couple of suggestions to open up more options. I probably would still rather trade hits with people but it would be nice to have an option rather than have to camp 24/7 to get anything.

anoniem

Member
2881

Aug 23rd 2013, 1:05:46

It's not the game developer's responsibility but adding something like random bot countries would create a new element to the game. That can't be bad?

re(ally)tired

Pain

Member
4849

Aug 23rd 2013, 1:07:20

the problem isnt L:L policies its when alliances/players abuse the xx% L:L on regular grabs, like if your policy is 80% L:L on all grabs and the retaller intentionally make the first retal fall below the 80% threshold and then matches networth and takes a huge second retal to complete "80%" L:L.

i think the policy of 1:1 on regular grabs and L:L on topfeeds (%125 land difference) would make grabbing happen more often. if you cant get L:L on your retal when the guy was within 125% of your landsize in 1 retal you suck at retalling and dont deserve the rest of the land.

Your mother is a nice woman

deepcode

Member
309

Aug 23rd 2013, 1:15:53

Why hasn't the facebook thing gone through yet.

There are millions of people who waste time on simple games like this on facebook that could bring a whole new life to earth.

Chewi

Member
891

Aug 23rd 2013, 1:36:32

Play primary.

mrford

Member
21,378

Aug 23rd 2013, 1:55:41

or learn how to net with less land

Swagger of a Chupacabra

[21:37:01] <&KILLERfluffY> when I was doing FA stuff for sof the person who gave me the longest angry rant was Mr Ford

locket

Member
6176

Aug 23rd 2013, 2:14:13

That statement is so retarded I can't even put it into proper words Ford. People are already doing that. People would like options on how to net. But you dont net anyways so why bother commenting on something that doesnt affect you?

Chewi are you happy with how alliance server is?

elvesrus

Member
5058

Aug 23rd 2013, 2:32:24

I'm perfectly happy with the lack of bots. Now if it wasn't for all the archaic pact terms...

Originally posted by crest23:

Elves is a douche on every server.

Requiem

Member

EE Patron
9474

Aug 23rd 2013, 2:34:34

This idea of bots has been brought up many, many times. Pang and Qz have both gave it thought. It is something that is on their minds and they know about the issue.

Land grabbing is very difficult because of the lack of targets. I haven't really land grabbed since this game stared in 2010? I can't remember when EE was created. Partly because I am lazy and partly because like you said every target is in huge DR. The only way to effectively LG right now is to camp news and camp DR expiration. Two things I refuse to do.

One issue is because it is a 0 sum game, meaning you gain land someone has to lose it, that makes people not want to get attacked ever. Politics have been setup that discourages grabbing and limits your options in Alliance. Primary doesn't have this problem and is very fun to grab in Primary.

The bottom line is that the way the game is setup now the only way to fix it is to 1. get more players or 2. get land bots going ran by the admins.

If anyone has a better idea let me know.

I financially support this game; what do you do?

locket

Member
6176

Aug 23rd 2013, 2:38:29

Well I agree with everything you said basically and my sitution is quite similar. I refuse to camp and thus dont get much land and have little to catch my interest while playing the game.

I would love it if there were other suggestions on this topic too. The 2nd country one was from a discussion between Syko/Xin I believe and Ershow had some points I suggested as well. It would just be great to have some chance of gaining land or choice in how to do it.

Kalick

Member
699

Aug 23rd 2013, 2:38:31

Originally posted by Requiem:

One issue is because it is a 0 sum game, meaning you gain land someone has to lose it, that makes people not want to get attacked ever.

No, it isn't. Ghost acres cause it to not be zero sum.

Atryn

Member
2149

Aug 23rd 2013, 2:39:28

Originally posted by Requiem:

One issue is because it is a 0 sum game, meaning you gain land someone has to lose it, that makes people not want to get attacked ever.

Isn't that where ghost came from?

Son Goku

Member
745

Aug 23rd 2013, 2:42:06

Whenever I try to grab other alliances they freak out, everyone likes the idea until they can't retal back.

mrford

Member
21,378

Aug 23rd 2013, 2:46:11

wahhhhhhh Earth Empires isnt a sandbox type gameplay so i cant get unlimited land wahhhhhh

you needs to change the game wahhhhhhh

thats all i hear

Swagger of a Chupacabra

[21:37:01] <&KILLERfluffY> when I was doing FA stuff for sof the person who gave me the longest angry rant was Mr Ford

Frodo

Member
405

Aug 23rd 2013, 2:52:39

no matter how many bots you make people will always want more land after awhile. Also if you didnt have all the politics you would have a lack of targets. But then we would be playing FFA not Alliance...

locket

Member
6176

Aug 23rd 2013, 2:53:30

Then you arent listening. You are acting like an child as usual. No one said unlimited land. People want options. So whiny of them right? No one even wants land handed to them on a platter.

mrford

Member
21,378

Aug 23rd 2013, 2:55:23

damn me for acting like a child. i suppose i should up my vocabulary and speak more professionally that way i wouldnt be childish, i would just be making a suggestion because im not getting what i want.

see the difference? i dont

Swagger of a Chupacabra

[21:37:01] <&KILLERfluffY> when I was doing FA stuff for sof the person who gave me the longest angry rant was Mr Ford

Pain

Member
4849

Aug 23rd 2013, 2:56:26

STFU FORD

Your mother is a nice woman

mrford

Member
21,378

Aug 23rd 2013, 2:58:54

YOU STFU HOE

Swagger of a Chupacabra

[21:37:01] <&KILLERfluffY> when I was doing FA stuff for sof the person who gave me the longest angry rant was Mr Ford

Requiem

Member

EE Patron
9474

Aug 23rd 2013, 3:18:06

Originally posted by Atryn:

Originally posted by Requiem:

One issue is because it is a 0 sum game, meaning you gain land someone has to lose it, that makes people not want to get attacked ever.

Isn't that where ghost came from?

Originally posted by Kalick:

Originally posted by Requiem:

One issue is because it is a 0 sum game, meaning you gain land someone has to lose it, that makes people not want to get attacked ever.

No, it isn't. Ghost acres cause it to not be zero sum.

No, but only because of politics.

I financially support this game; what do you do?

DespicableMe

Member
485

Aug 23rd 2013, 7:30:01

and what is your ideal land goal locket?

XiQter MD

Member
261

Aug 23rd 2013, 12:17:09

or you could always add land to the market, it would be interesting to see how its value would fluctate

Erian

Member
702

Aug 23rd 2013, 12:29:00

Adding land to the market would be pretty awesome! It would be self regulating, and those that are heavily farmed can still explore and sell at pretty good rates with the high low land explore values.

It might even be possible to do some kind of low land demo resell + explore and sell land strategy. That would be wicked!

Home Turf

Member
798

Aug 23rd 2013, 12:39:05

The alliances need to quit pacting with everyone that has a clan name. There should be a straight 1:1 retal scenario.

There is no such thing as top or bottom feeding. If you cant figure out a way to get your land back, than you or your alliance didn't deserve it in the first place.

Most lg rules are in place because people whom cant properly do retals needed some way to get land back, because they suck at retalling and cant get it any other way.

And for the all explorers, umm this is a WAR game, not a explore game.

Requiem

Member

EE Patron
9474

Aug 23rd 2013, 12:43:53

Originally posted by Home Turf:

I like that. I've said many times I think alliances shouldn't pact out.

If no one pacted out and we all had a 1:1 retal policy there'd be plenty of people to grab and everyone should be able to be happy with that.

I financially support this game; what do you do?

locket

Member
6176

Aug 23rd 2013, 12:55:23

@home turf I view it as an aggressive country building game. I'd thank you to not define it for me ;)

Soultaker

Member
472

Aug 23rd 2013, 13:26:12

i think that getting more players would be really nice... adding the game to FB would be interesting and the flux of new players would be cool to have, it would also change the 1A politics since new alliances are bound to appear.
And it meakes a lot more sens then bots

And i don't particularly like the 2 country idea, i think there will be a lot of players that won't play their 2nd country

PS: we need to addapt to everything that's new and FB works out great for a lot of new games just look at Utopia... it's doing fine with FB

Edited By: Soultaker on Aug 23rd 2013, 13:28:41
See Original Post

BILL_DANGER

Member
524

Aug 23rd 2013, 14:01:32

Originally posted by Kalick:

^^ THIS ^^

ALTHOUGH SOME POLICIES, SUCH AS VIOLENT PACIFISM OF COURSE, ARE FAR FROM RIDICULOUS!! HA!

BUT SERIOUSLY, THIS GAME IS AND ALWAYS HAS BEEN BUILT AROUND CONFLICT OVER LAND. I FAIL TO SEE WHAT WOULD BE THE POINT OF PLAYING A MULTI-PLAYER GAME WHERE THE PRIMARY CONFLICT TAKES PLACE BETWEEN YOU AND BOTS.

IN ADDITION, I DON'T SEE HOW BOTS WOULD HELP, REALLY. PEOPLE WOULD FARM THE BOTS INTO DR AND THE TOP COUNTRIES WOULD BE FATTER. THEN THE COMPLAINTS THAT THERE AREN'T "ENOUGH" BOTS WOULD START, OR THE DEMANDS THAT BOTS BE EXEMPT FROM DR, ETC, ALL OF WHICH BOILS DOWN TO WHAT OTHERS HAVE ALREADY SAID: PEOPLE WANT FREE LAND WITH NO RISK ATTACHED.

THE ONLY WAY I WOULD *POSSIBLY* SUPPORT BOTS IS IF THEY WERE TRUE BOT PLAYERS, I.E., THEY WILL HIT BACK. RISE OF THE MACHINES AND ALL THAT!

HA!
BILL
FUTURE OVERLORD OF A BOT ARMY
THE MIGHTY CLAN [DANGER]!

Xinhuan

Member
3728

Aug 23rd 2013, 14:06:31

Originally posted by Home Turf:

There is no such thing as top or bottom feeding. If you cant figure out a way to get your land back, than you or your alliance didn't deserve it in the first place.

You might want to look at what you are saying. Most alliances HAVE figured out a way to get their land back. It's called Land:Land retals, and most alliances are willing to enforce it by going to war with whoever disagrees with it, particularly the 1:1 retal supporters like you.

blid

Member

EE Patron
9319

Aug 23rd 2013, 14:20:42

Originally posted by locket:

Originally posted by Kalick:

Even if you did add 1000 new players, why would they join Alliance server and stay untagged? Why should there be any untagged players to begin with on an Alliance server?

Edited By: blid on Aug 23rd 2013, 14:32:43
See Original Post

Originally posted by Mr. Titanium:

Watch your mouth boy, I have never been accused of cheating on any server nor deleted before you just did right there.

tellarion

Member
3906

Aug 23rd 2013, 14:46:15

Originally posted by Home Turf:

You like to call it a war game, but even warring countries still have to build those damn countries. Why do you think Laf is good at war? They are damn good at building countries, and that is one of their biggest strengths in war.

Once again, you have a lot of people who don't even net trying to declare how the other half should play.

Home Turf

Member
798

Aug 23rd 2013, 14:53:39

The alliances that have land:land speaks for itself. They are too weak minded to accept they built their countries wrong, and cant protect their land. So in other words they are saying, I will build a weak country, you hit it, we will get our land back regardless of what you do. The same as pacting with everyone. Its obvious these alliances are too afraid or not good enuff to stand on their own quality gameplay. If youll notice the very top alliances does not have land:land policies, instead relying on their quality gameplay to carry the day. Rather than the Im a wussy and because I have a worthless land:land policy I know I will get my land back so I will build the crappiest country possible. Simple common sense.

Oh and if the politics and stupid retal policies where eliminated there would be more untagged. Used to be a bunch of what yall called suiciders, got together and attacked alliances that farmed untagged. While at the same time they would kill countries that farmed one of their countries, it wasn't appropriate for the untagged to do that. kinda hypocritical isn't it?

Soultaker

Member
472

Aug 23rd 2013, 15:19:16

Originally posted by blid:

Originally posted by locket:

Originally posted by Kalick:

Even if you did add 1000 new players, why would they join Alliance server and stay untagged? Why should there be any untagged players to begin with on an Alliance server?

there might not be untagged players but there would be new clans and the game politics might change

TNTroXxor

Member
1295

Aug 23rd 2013, 16:51:47

Originally posted by Home Turf:

Used to be a bunch of what yall called suiciders, got together and attacked alliances that farmed untagged. While at the same time they would kill countries that farmed one of their countries, it wasn't appropriate for the untagged to do that. kinda hypocritical isn't it?

Can you stick a flag somewhere can call yourself king of the land ? Actually, you could. But the bigger king with the bigger land would wipe your ass with it.

What you are suggesting is revert the politics and start over. Your failure to see that after sometime, we'll end up the way we are right now.

ITS CALL THE fluffING ALLIANCE SERVER for a reason ya know

Originally posted by JJ23:

i havent been deleted since last set

qzjul

Administrator
Game Development
10,263

Aug 23rd 2013, 17:08:45

NPC's are something I'd like to do; however, as you must imagine, that isn't an overnight sort of thing. There are other things before that on the priority list, namely the forum integration & UI overhaul. (which Pang & I are actually working on currently)

As for facebook, that's waiting for the forum integration & UI overhaul, as our systems currently aren't liked very well -- once they are it'll be easier to do many other things.

Pang had started on an interface for bots to work with, but when I redid the game back-end that stuff didn't make it through the conversion; so i'd have to make a bot interface first; then design/write/test bots.

I have actually considered a bot server.....

Anyway, forums first though.

Finally did the signature thing.

Atryn

Member
2149

Aug 23rd 2013, 19:44:12

Originally posted by qzjul:

I have actually considered a bot server.....

Introduce gambling!

Have an all NPC-bot server with different clans using different AI algorithms. Players could then bet on who they think will win each set. Over time, the winning AI can then be introduced to 1A as an evolved AI.

Atryn

Member
2149

Aug 23rd 2013, 19:50:49

BTW, we did that ^^ on the Moral Decay MUD like 10-15 years ago. It is a place called the Arena and we have NPCs of different types fight in scheduled bouts. Players bet/gamble and win based on odds that are auto-generated by the win/loss records of the relevant opponents in that match, etc.