| Author | Thread: Stopping High Level Abusive Attackers |
| Dilt Posts: 167
Location: Fellin
Magus Age: 112 years old
| Message #27995 Posted: Mar 22, 2009, 6:20 pm |
Suppose a very high level person was running around and smashing workshops with a heavily boosted golem, while dumping all of their resources to clan/clanmates/alts/market and leaving out but a flesh 1 guard to prevent XP loss. This way, they do not have any chance to lose XP/score/resources or anything. This is horribly unbalanced and has been used by many different people in the past and present to avoid repercussions for their violent activities. What are ways we could stop this from happening? I've thought up two ideas, feel free to add more.
1) Attacking Golem Ambush: This one has been talked about before. Basically, when a golem is sent out to attack, one can attack the attacking golem while it's returning from its attack. This can either be done through the normal 'click fight' method or through a separate attack button. This will cull down the abuse of 'I have no resources or defender, but I still have a golem out attacking things, so you can't get my XP/score, or my super golem either!'. It would certainly stop some of the worst attackers from using their 80 strength hunters so easily, or if not, allow the defenders a chance to actually fight back against a real golem instead of a flesh 1 throwaway guard.
2) Non-Aggression Bills: This one is a little more fanatical, but perhaps we could pass bills in Senate against certain people. Should the bill pass, then a period of No-PvP will be forced upon them (to be fair, it's normal no-pvp, no attacking or being attacked). This should stop the worst transgressors, chosen by democratic vote. The only thing I could see wrong with this is that No-PvP can be bought for premium tickets, so Senate might be abused to gather up free No-PvP. Perhaps this type of bill should be limited to once per certain time per clan? It's the perfect type of bill to stop repeat offenders.
|
|
| Rednaxela Posts: 177
Location: Rimesvin
Magus Age: 120 years old
| Message #27998 Posted: Mar 22, 2009, 6:38 pm |
| I agree with the general point. About idea #1, I think for fairness either "it should only be allowed to be done by the attacked magus/clan" or "Only when the ambushed golem is on a PvP mission" should limit it. |
|
masterslugPosts: 619 Location: Shuul Magus Age: 124 years old Clan: OTAKU | Message #28034 Posted: Mar 23, 2009, 8:04 am |
| I like both these Ideas Dilt. |
|
PeggaPosts: 702 Location: Jaaron Magus Age: 122 years old Clan: ADV | Message #28114 Posted: Mar 24, 2009, 12:41 pm |
I'd toss in adding a time limit to attacks from members from the same clan. That way, it prevents a coordinated, seconds apart attack where a clan organizes (via IRC or something), blows away the door golem and clan guard, then proceeds to loot a workshop for all its worth. This gives the owner or other clan member time to replace the door guard or repair the clan guard and at least put up a response.
For example, a clan member could attack a workshop, but then no other clan member would be allowed to attack for, say, 5 or 15 minutes real time. I would propose that the original attacker could continue without the time limit, but they wouldn't be able to get any assistance from another member.
This wouldn't prevent multiple clans joining together, but I think it would get rid of some of the abuse people have taken in the past. |
|
laidanPosts: 1158 Location: Mottonsborough Magus Age: 113 years old Clan: OASIS | Message #28124 Posted: Mar 24, 2009, 3:55 pm |
| On a semi-related note, it would be nice to see who your clan-mates have attacked in the recent past, as I try to avoid giving too much of a beat-down to one person (with a few occasional exceptions) and feel bad when it seems like my clan is picking on someone but it is just an accident. |
|
| Rednaxela Posts: 177
Location: Rimesvin
Magus Age: 120 years old
| Message #28128 Posted: Mar 24, 2009, 4:37 pm |
| Pegga said:
For example, a clan member could attack a workshop, but then no other clan member would be allowed to attack for, say, 5 or 15 minutes real time. I would propose that the original attacker could continue without the time limit, but they wouldn't be able to get any assistance from another member.
I believe a more well-rounded way to do things would be a maximum on the number of total attacks (doesn't matter if same magus, same clan, completely unrelated) against a workshop within a 10 minute time span. |
|
| Dilt Posts: 167
Location: Fellin
Magus Age: 112 years old
| Message #28156 Posted: Mar 24, 2009, 10:11 pm |
Good development on the limit-to-max-attacks-within-certain-time idea, but if this is implemented, we have to consider the Rat Swarm and Wall of Granite spells - they already hinder attacks fairly well, and can be very easily recast. They'll have to be taken in consideration if the time attack limiters are implemented. Also, the imperial guard 6-attacks-in-24-hours limits which don't work on people in clans might somehow be useful in figuring out a way to limit the attacks on someone.
Anyway, this is deviating a little. The problem is mainly single persons with max boosted golems attacking people only a few times and decimating serious defenders fairly easily. I believe that the ambush method would make attacking these hard-worked golems possible (considering most times when these are used, they are immediately withdrawn to basement the moment they return to workshop), leading to an effective deterrant for using strong hitters abusively. |
|
laidanPosts: 1158 Location: Mottonsborough Magus Age: 113 years old Clan: OASIS | Message #28164 Posted: Mar 24, 2009, 11:05 pm |
| One problem I see is how do you define "abusive attacker"? At higher levels attacks have to be pretty ridiculous before they become more than a minor annoyance. Personally, as long as you're not raiding my resources (and honestly why bother?) I welcome attacks for the free xp I get, even if I lose the whole golem. The idea of being able to ambush a returning attacker seems interesting, and even kinda makes sense, but there should be some way to prevent it being abused, as mentioned above, and maybe it should cost more motivation or something? The main issue I see is still the flesh golem or armless golem defense, where their guard is there for show only, but somehow stops you doing anything anyway. |
|
| Dilt Posts: 167
Location: Fellin
Magus Age: 112 years old
| Message #28185 Posted: Mar 25, 2009, 5:14 am |
| I meant high level abusive attacker, as in a high level person is attacking lower leveled folks while dumping all resources to an alt/clan/clanmate and leaving out just a flesh1 defender to get XP from. Essentially, XP farming to the utmost level. If the lower level people counterattack, the person just gets free XP and doesn't lose anything (it's hard to kill a 50hp armored chest over the unarmored flesh1 abs/pelvis, so they don't lose XP/score along with dumped resources). If one is perfectly careful, then this is pretty flawless... except for the quiet seconds just getting out of work and before dumping the cash, or the split second between the golem getting back at the workshop and basementing it. |
|
masterslugPosts: 619 Location: Shuul Magus Age: 124 years old Clan: OTAKU | Message #28205 Posted: Mar 25, 2009, 9:17 am |
Perhaps the ambush idea might work if a player and or clan, could only nominate a single name to be the ambush target and a single golem to do the ambushing. That way you could not use it as a standard defense or effectively in a clan war. Only to discourage repeat farming of a player.
It would also mean that if a player is getting ambushed every time they go out PVPing by a number of different magi/clans they will soon get the hint on how other magi believe they are behaving. |
|
| |
| |
