My own idea is to get a similar feature to what we have in Kingdoms, but without essentially binding the player to the king's decisions. When a player starts the game, they can request to be another nearby player's mentee. A mentor would receive regular tributes from their mentees (and similarly to Kingdoms's king system, these tribute resources are a separate pool and do not cost the mentees their own resources). This gives the mentors an incentive to defend their mentees as they are a constant source of free resources. If a mentee is attacked, resources are always taken from the tributes first (whether or not a cranny can protect tributes is up for debate). A mentor is unable to attack their mentee and vice versa, only reinforcements can be sent.
The mentorship would end once certain conditions are met (at which point it is no longer possible to become a mentee), or one of the parties ends it, but in both cases it will not end instantly, there would be a countdown.
It would not be possible to be a mentor to a player you have already attacked before, this is to discourage extortion tactics ("be my mentee or else"). The tributes have to offer better income than raiding the player would, but it doesn't have to be much.
Even this wouldn't be a perfect solution, it would still be up to the player to even discover the feature (and a lot of players just click through everything) and some people are simply incapable of actually being a mentor, despite acting as one.
While I understand the principle, I think any system like this is going to be massively open to abuse. What would stop me opening an account on a new server, pretending to be a new player and passing the res bonus over to my mate?
Tit for tat?
I'm sorry but both came in rather testy, placing blame fully on raider accounts with multiple duals (beyond what we on com even considered norm). Now Speed and Finals may have more duals on average; its almost necessary i think, but 8+ is not the norm, nor does it translate to dominance. I respect that they care about increasing member count, but the scope of their focus - that heavy raiding is the issue driving new players away, is too narrow in my opinion.
A suggestion was made and it's being discussed. They weren't testy, just defending an idea they supported. That doesn't make their viewpoint any less valid than yours.