W3C - War Issues and possible solutions

In the past days we had some incidents with wars fought by a group of people from one account.

Laguna alerted us to the problem and based on his observations, we have stopped several wars and may stop more.

In principle, we do not think that we should interfere in wars. We have trusted his judgment in this case and acted.

Wars are part of simcountry and players can decide to participate or refrain from fighting. The secured mode feature offers protection that in the opinion of many, already goes too far.
We want war to be fair and if possible, we would like all participants to be there when fighting takes place.

If anything should change in the war protection features, it should probably be directed at some limited fighting features that could involve all countries, even in secured mode, without removing the basic idea that secured mode should remain the base for long term protection of player’s accounts against total destruction.

There are some problems and possible solutions:
Accounts can currently be used to wage war by two or more players, from different IP numbers that are far apart, in different cities, or countries. They can arrange fighting to continue around the clock while the defender is unable to be available and fight back. This is unfair and should obviously stop immediately.

The simcountry site has all the login data from day one and we know which IP numbers are being used for every account.
We are now considering this practice a multi playing.
As of today, we will check accounts and will act where this is used.

To start with, we will just check several accounts from time to time and if we find multiple IP numbers, we will block the account. In time, we will automate this process.

Fighting a sleeping enemy is a more general problem. Wars are declared to start when the enemy is not available. Most wars can be fought and won while one of the parties is not participating.

We would like to introduce “Black out� or “Cease Fire� periods that can be set for each country by its president. The feature will be active for wars between countries with presidents.

We suggest that each country can be set to have 8 daily blackout periods of one hour each. During these periods, the country cannot attack and cannot be attacked. Wars can be declared at all time but actual fighting is not possible, unless both countries involved are not in such a blackout period.

Each president will be able to set up to 8 such periods and the blackout period between any two countries with a president may be 8 to 16 hours in total. Changes to the settings will be possible during periods when the country is not involved in any war.

There are some issues that may make this a little tricky. Some of these issues were raised by Laguna who previewed this possible solution yesterday.
If third party units are stationed in the country and they are attacked while their owner is blacked out, these units will fight back. In fact, all defense forces, including federation support, will participate if triggered by any attack.

This feature will make shared wars close to obsolete and will allow everyone to sleep or work or even both.
We would like to see it active on all worlds although the length of the period may vary.
There will be no Blackout periods if one of the fighting countries does not have a president.

The feature is not decided upon yet. It is an idea.

Some of us are mobile people! I log in from 3 to 4 differernt locations. If I could I would use my phone aswell, but sim is not phone friendly ;-)
People log in from home/work/school/friends etc.
Some care would be needed before blocking accounts because of different IP numbers.

Three years ago, a large war on Fearless Blue erupted between TPSX and NSA. NSA won. All TPSX members, already semi-active left. It was the beginning of the end.
Some months afterwards, when Doublestar was leaving, he attacked Lacerta (federation) with NSA finishing the job. All of the players NSA, TPSX and Lacerta left, expect one. Between one event and the other, many players were terrified and left.

For two years and a half, Fearless Blue has been pretty much dead. If I were to make a comparison between LU and FB, I would call LU, USA and FB, Serra Leoa.

It is of poor judgement and faith to repeat such event or even to allow it again.

Such devastation comes from the possibilities and oversights the game has and the structure of the community. I've been discussing this with Willard for two weeks now. Before anyone even begins to shout, it was before I stepped in this... "unfortunate series of events".

I've been here long enough to see how things turn.


Account sharing:
I can understand allowing another player to do maintenance on your account on your absent for a week or two, but even this should be formal as it is in Tribal Wars and other games. In other games, you have to make a post on the forum stating the start and end time, who are the persons involved and have it approved.

Reasons against account sharing: everything from multiplaying plus some.


Cease Fires:
Interesting solution on a single player/country vs. single player/country, not such much when it involves others.


I would rather think of another way that turns the actual time warring less devastating and important, but focus more on the actual ability to keeping the country conquered. Has nothing to do with rebels or game mechanics; it depends of players. It is, however, a complex proposal and that allows many limits on war to be lifted and opens, and formalizes the actual diplomatic side of the game. I've been writing notes for almost two years now, but as things are... it will take a long time to finish it.


Khan,
Do you log in with all those devices and use them simultaneously on your account? Impossible much?

This is fine. What we mean is IP numbers that are in different cities, countries, time zones.

OK, gotcha! I can relax now ;-)

while i am grateful for the thought, i prefer the round the clock wars the way they are

plus, as far as the black out period goes, when the black out period ends, their should be a minimum time before it starts again, to avoid people doing something like 30 minutes on, 30 minutes off...

but the round the clock thing, if i have my black out period, at one point, and another has it at another point, i may have to stay up all night, or (i wouldn't,) miss a day of work to fight a war... i appreciate the thought, but i'd perfer we found another way

not like it matters, but im strongly against the notion that attacker should not be able to choose time and place of her/his attack.

if anything the war engine should be reworked.

Tribal Wars is awful. You can't be good WITHOUT someone sitting your account while you sleep. I agree with the decision to monitor this. I don't agree with the idea of blackouts.

Perhaps the old attack-turn/limits system should be re-visited... obviously with a lot of changes since 200 interceptor wings would be a pain to take down with 5-attacks per turn.


EDIT: A thought about blackouts: would the blackout times be publicly viewable? It's not like knowing "this is when _____ sleeps" would be a problem since they couldn't be attacked. If both players had viewable blackout times, they would be able to find a space where both are able to fight.... But I still don't like the idea of blackouts at all.


As for my own account, I emailed the GMs not too long after I started playing and informed them about my log-on habits, jumping from my house, to school, to the parent's house on occasion - which is in another city, but geographically not far and certainly in the same time zone.

Tom I also do log into the game from Home, work and mobile. Being a tech guy, depening on what work I am doing my hope IP will show up in one geographical location. Broadband will show up from another and while "work A" shows up on one coast and "work B" shows up from another.

Blackout periods, if implemented, should be visible and cannot be changed all the time to spread confusion.

there will be many hours when both are availble.
The idea is to have a higher chance that war is fought between two presidents rathen than by one against a sleeping oponent.

IP numbers close by are OK. IP numbers in different time zones, or countries is a different case.

I am currently in Houston, US, but will shortly be going to the UK and accessing my account from the UK. One day i will be accessing the account from the US and the next day it will be from the UK. I will be very unlikely to access the account from the US again.

Am I at risk?

Tom,

I am currently fighting a war. Just a few minutes ago I started getting these messages in the two countries I was using:

"Attack Aborted!"

and

"Sorry, couldn't setup a new Air Force Attack and Bombing Wing. Please try again later."

when I tried making new wings.

Explanation?

Edit: I just tried from a third country and got the same thing. If my war is being stopped, I'd like to know so I can go have pizza.

same here .. Aborted

Laguna, if you are having a similar issue, I'm willing to postpone the resuming of fighting until a time where you will be available. I'm through with the semester, so we can use your timetable if you like.

If not, I suppose whoever is logged in when it starts working again has the upper hand.

It's a better message than "Can't target this unit."

I will only be available in July. No joke.

I want to be gone by july. Buy a c3 for 50 coins from you and let the decs expire? That should cover the ints, and bombers, and fighters....

We need a mediator.

SAM!!!!!

Tom,

So what you are saying is that if I go on vacation or business trip somewhere I will be blocked?

You know, people do have trips. Sometimes they bring laptops with them.

It is easily possible, and probably somewhat if not fairly common, for an user IP address to pop up in a different timezone and still be the actual owner of the account.

Yet MORE reasons not to renew.

No, Keith.

He is saying if several players log in to the same account to perpetuate war 24 hours over 24 hours, they will be blocked.

The reasons are the same for multiplaying and some others.

Plus, it degrades the really tactical plans of war (on any game). It separates those who can actually make decisions from those who can't.

I've logged in to my account from all sorts of locations to date. I would only be worried if those same IPs would show up in someone else's account regularly. I find that coincidence unlikely, specially when IPv6 is on the way.


Thanks, Wild, but I don't need compensation.

Okay. This is crazy.

It appears as though when "certain" (no not just you LG. You know I luuv ya, your the bestest ) players make issue of things that would ordinarily be of no concern to anyone, not to mention common knowledge to most involved parties; the Game Godds are quick with a response. Often dramatic in consequence and usually players are split down the middle on if it is good/bad idea.


I seriously don't even agree at all with any restrictions in part. The changes or relief provided in this discussion should be concrete and binding clear and without confusion.

For Tom to say, "IP numbers close by are OK. IP numbers in different time zones, or countries is a different case."

How???? If I have a friend that lives in in Germany, we are in the same fed, and we get along why can't I have him/her fight a war for me if I can't get online? That doesn't make any sense to stop it now. From what I understand it has been going on for years. IS/HAS been NO SECRET. That is how the WARLORDS LORD OVER THE LAND.


Why now? Because ?? Whatever reason you could imagine doesn't make sense or apply if it didn't make sense or apply yesterday. Just throwing a reason as to why it is a problem now out in the open is all your doing throwing a reason around. But one could speculate as to why the timing of such changes, the parties involved, and the scope of the war, all make these sudden game changers a bit suspect as to the true motive of these changes.

Lg I could never achieve what I hear you have on this game. I am sure you have way more assets and time in, so w3c will respect your opinion. I also think given the last two conflicts you have been in(FB and now LU), w3c has implemented navy changes, moments before my decs went active. Instead of inflicting ANY MEASURABLE damage on his country, I watched 15K nfps get creamed.

ON LU now this happens and BAM BAM BAM another wacky change. Comon man I need a monent to digest the last round of changes.

I hope you understand my comments LG, not personal or accusational at all. I just call it how I see it, and I know you would too.


Blackouts should NOT be implemented.
Secured Mode should NOT be changed.
Accounts should not be blocked (IMO) for multiple ips.

Gang Banb Style Warfare has been going on for as long as I have been playing and I am sure even longer.

This is called strategy. You don't want me to fight a sleeping president? What should I do? I have a wonderful story as a case in point.

Two tribes shadowing each other in the countryside. Each tribe waiting for the right opportunity to attack the other. After many months (4), The one tribe notices that the other tribe has setup camp and is fast asleep. The Chief says to his warriors, "they are asleep with their guard down, we will strike them when it is hardest to defend. If we succeed in an attack, casualties and collateral damage will be significantly lower on both side and we will still achieve a decisive and powerful victory!"

All the warriors agreed. And they set out for the camp of the sleeping tribe. All of a sudden, while the warriors were still on their way, a bright light appeared and it was the Lizard King Jozi. He was furious. He scolded the warriors that had thought to plunder their sleeping enemies. He thundered, "How dare you conquer your enemies by using trickery, deception, and strategic planning! HOW DARE YOU. This madness will cease at ONCE." And the Lizard King Jozi Dispersed the tribes back to their native lands and ended all wars.

With the news of the Lizard King's intervention into the wars of the tribes, a great lament went up before the Game God Jozi, and he heard their cry. And The Game God was moved by compassion and quickly aided his subjects...

To be continued . . .


And now IMO bad idea all the way around.

And now that my hormone pills have worn off, I AM PISSED!!!!!!

I guess what I am really trying to say is. . .

Jozi the Lizard and LG,

Would you both like Nukes up your arses?!?!?! LoooLz

JKJKJK please don't ban me.

It appears as though when "certain" (no not just you LG. You know I luuv ya, your the bestest ) players make issue of things that would ordinarily be of no concern to anyone, not to mention common knowledge to most involved parties; the Game Godds are quick with a response. Often dramatic in consequence and usually players are split down the middle on if it is good/bad idea. - ShcyzMattiCa

no kidding

Lol. Hormones are a hell of a drug.

Fuck cocaine.

Well I am new to the game but I figure that I will put my opinion into it also. I am a district manager for a company and travel the southeast of the united stats. From Virginia to Alabama, and on into the southern part of Florida. So by the discussion of this feed I would be banned because of using multiple I.P.'s
I also log in at work, home, lap top, girlfreind's house. Basically I play a game I paid for whenever and wherever I feel like it. I payed for the membership it is mine to use.
I also have the situation where my girlfreind's son is the one that introduced me to the game and as we speak I am on his computer. So am I to assume when I return home I will be banned?
You can limit the login I.D. to only be valid for one session, if an attempt is made to log into the same account while it is in use, than you have an issue. You have the option to disconnect one and leave one connected. You may then put a temp lock on the account until the owner can verify his information and why and how 2 different attempts were made at the same time.
As far as a black out time I would challenge the user requesting this to tell us how manay times that he has attacked a country in the absence of the president.
We can program game functions in to respons to attackers in a certain way. Go for the weakest first largest first air poer etc.. It is within the ability of the owners to accomplish this. The country will already defend itself to some extent improve and expand the automated features.

To me, it seems the whole 'blackout' idea is very similar to asking someone to play in your account if you are away.

Blackouts GREATLY restrict game play. Some players only can play after work, at night in their specific time zones. If I was picking out a potential target to attack, I would try to find out when that person fought most often, and could easily change my blackout period to be when they like to fight. While this may seem unfair to some, I KNOW that this feature WOULD be used in that manner, and it would cause more problems than good.

While I agree that having multiple players play from an account at once is an unfair advantage, I would like to suggest that there can only be one IP in an account at any given time. This way, there is no unfair advantage involved by having more people clicking at once, and if someone happens to be away when a war is being fought, they can have a means of defending their country through allies.

As far as countries being taken while players are 'asleep,' people live in different time zones. I know of two specific instances where I have conquered countries that were not being actively defended. One would have had a good chance of holding, the other not so much, but I can understand the frustration involved. I have had the same thing happen to me. This said, I would suggest that other players take advantage of the same opportunity that is being used against them.

<!-Quote-!>Quote:

How???? If I have a friend that lives in in Germany, we are in the same fed, and we get along why can't I have him/her fight a war for me if I can't get online? That doesn't make any sense to stop it now. From what I understand it has been going on for years. IS/HAS been NO SECRET. That is how the WARLORDS LORD OVER THE LAND.<!-/Quote-!>

Read the post. And no, it hasn't been going on for years. And no, it isn't transparent. And let me see how many people have logged in to my account: me and... oh!, me! It ought to be more than obvious why you should not share your account.

No to pretty much everything else you said, Wendy. Sleeping isn't losing interest. I've read better parables. And a watch your language.

<!-Quote-!>Quote:

Gang Banb Style Warfare has been going on for as long as I have been playing and I am sure even longer.

This is called strategy.<!-/Quote-!>

That's somewhat ironic. Brute force attack (Brute force) is also a "strategy", but it doesn't has the same reasoning as Birthday attack (Probability and observation), or the grace of Collision (Precision). You should find someone else to talk about strategy. Preferably, someone who doesn't understand tactics are constructed to take advantage of limitations/oversights/disadvantages. If that someone does understand that, he would understand that having several people is hurtful for those who actually use strategy.

I'm heard because I make reason. You can try it too.

Actually, as a point of order:

"Fighting a sleeping enemy is a more general problem. Wars are declared to start when the enemy is not available. Most wars can be fought and won while one of the parties is not participating."


I declare wars without any regard for what the habits of my opponent may be. The only thing *I* am concerned about is making sure that *I* will be there and have plenty of time to fight.

Fighting a country that just sits there is actually rather boring.