[COM] Discussion about the 🔥 Legends on Tour 2020 - Summit 🔥

I'm fairly sure it existed since before that date ( maybe not as 1.1 but that line was present )

And simming massively without even raiding at coordinates so isolated that make taking any action ( attack ) pointless, you call that helping having fighting ?

I call that putting more nails in the coffin.

To raid inactives you have to be relatively close to them if you want to have resources back quick enough to try to grow a big army. So if you are relatively close = you can be attacked.

Or your idea of how this game has to become is just 1 fortress at 280/280 with all the wwks / supports and pds, for each team, and just spend 9 months doing nothing and risking nothing ?.

Why would someone have even the interest to join such a static game ? Put back 1.1 , remove the static variable that the absence of 1.1 is creating/allowing

I should probably have made myself even more clear - what I suggested is intended to/will reduce the usage of both multies and techs.

Firstly, because the two are so closely related - both types of accounts serve the same purpose. I would love to have a perfect cheat detection system that caught every single multi account, but that won't happen. So another way to combat multies is to reduce the usage of multies.

Secondly, you (proponents of techs) might have gotten what you desired with TG now supporting tech accounts. But there are a lot of players who do not like the tech game at all. To a degree I understand TG's arguments (that it's hard to enforce, and hard to create proper rules against) and I am well aware of your own arguments. I have given up on fighting tech accounts. But that does not mean I will not fight to implement restrictions to reduce the usefulness of techs through hard-coded mechanics - for the thousands of players who dislike techs, and because I think techs are generally unhealthy for the game (reducing action on servers, and limiting interactability (1 village WWKs being the extreme)). If you are not willing to give some concessions the other way to those who dislike this playstyle... Well, that's highly egoistical and won't benefit the game or the size of the playerbase at all.

cris@ wrote:

Do you intend excluding Diet from garage too

You clearly didn't read my post.

cris@ wrote:

nowhere is written that there is only one way to build a WWk and this way is raiding inactive (it is your way I know).

But we have resource pushing restrictions in place to put a limit to boosting other accounts - garaging or raiding the resources instead is a way to circumvent this. With raiding inactives, you put in a lot of effort to increase the amount of resources available to you - it's definitely not the same effort to have a friendly account provide 200k+ resources per hour for you. Even with my suggestion, you can still use your beloved tech accounts anyway - You can still have your pushing accounts set up to push an account when it gets its turn in the trainer rotation. And parking even just 60k (3 accounts) in the early/mid game is pretty significant - but the WWK can't just be afk the whole server with 600k parked in three different caps. Heck, I am even open to discussing the exact numbers, as I mentioned. Perhaps 30k would be okay too.

cris@ wrote:

More over 48 hrs for recovering from hit? and keeping troops going to being fed 20k each for let's say a whole quad? with likely no ts? Did you include travel time calculation in your proposal?

I'm really scared

You again didn't read my post properly, and you exaggerate and mislead. I did not say it will only take 48 hours to recover from a hit. But 24, or 48 hours, is more than enough to have rebuilt your granary capacity in hammer, your TS and so on. With this, and a bit of alliance pushing, you can easily start raiding again, start to distribute your army at other accounts, or keep bouncing the army between players. If your cap wasn't hit, you should even still have a significant income of crop to feed at least parts of the army. If it was your cap that was hit - well, you still have your granary capacity and TS in your hammer village, and you can still park your troops for a bit while you work on your cap fields.

You're acting like getting your cap/hammer village hit shouldn't inconvene you in any way. That's completely ridicolous. Again, it takes away interactability from the game. Let's say an enemy team risks a million off troops trying to hit your WWK, and perhaps loses ½ a million off, gets through, but doesn't chief the village because cap was changed to non-cap, and 0 pop didn't suceed due to stone mason. Now you want that WWK to not be affected in any way, because 1: the WWK doesn't send a single raid to anything but friendlies, so it doesn't matter if troops aren't at home to raid (they're parked at garages 24/7 anyway). 2: The cap doesn't matter because it was being fed primarily by other accounts anyway. 3: The queues won't be affected since the res used for the queues, again, comes from friendly accounts.

If you want to further discuss this, I would encourage you to read my post in full this time, so we can have a genuine discussion.

I would like to bring another, even related to techs in my opinion, topic. The subject was brought up on ru forums, here is the thread if you are kin to use google-translate (need to practice anyway if all-in-one-domain idea goes life). Don't be confused with thrush and koala mentions, it is not about zoo improvements. Thrush is a slang for invincible WWK (or just a hammer) account, koala (coala) is short for coalition, i.e. all confederacy or meta.

In short, the thread is about one old tactic which becomes more and more popular in last couple of years and I believe will be next witch hunt on com after dust of removing 1.1. settles down. The account is cataed down to 1 village with the hammer which makes it impossible to kill the hammer even if you zero the village. The proposal is to make troops gone if the village is zeroed.

Can we please hear thought from wishmaster3  Marduk_COM aka mazzi and, especially, from Mentally , as well as from everyone else?

What was there before 1.1? Why was it introduced in 2016?

Ticker empty space

Ticker wrote:

Why was it introduced in 2016?

ELE and this part?

I don't know to be honest.

Nvm, maybe cris@ knows. We'll wait for her. Or someone else maybe...

This is a war game.

Having said that anyone who decides to build a WWK builds it to ses that one statement "Wonder of the world has been destroyed". How they want to build it is completely their concern. If they have 4 friends who want to help them then why are you so keen into ruining the game for those 4 friends and the WWK acc itself.

If you and so keen on raiding just build multiple working hammers and use them. Use them to harass those friends.

Everyone should play the game in their own style. They want to play sim city for 220 days to 0 the WW on day 221 its their choice.

You want to start training clubs from day 1 and raid for 220 days your choice. What if TG implements a rule tomorrow about raiding which says you can only raid 200k resources per day,would you approve? (Ohh wait, someone tried something like that and got trashed)...anyways...

You cant implement a rule just because you do not approve that play style.

Yes, there's one thing we agree on. If techs stay, I don't see a reason to eliminate "invincible wwks". They just want to play. Why would you remove their troops and change rules again?

Because there is no counter to it, even in theory. You can’t kill it.

And you just realized it now? Why is that an issue all of a sudden? It's an old thing as someone already said it.

Ticker wrote:

Yes, there's one thing we agree on. If techs stay, I don't see a reason to eliminate "invincible wwks". They just want to play. Why would you remove their troops and change rules again?

You can counter 4 friends and wwk by attacking them. You croplock a friends cap thats 120-200k resources/parking gone for wwk or try to chief the wwk itself and the hammer is gone and thats your reward for attacking.

Invincible WWKs cant be countered. Even if you plan a train and 0 pop it the hammer stays so there is no reward and with alliance help it will bite you later.

Alcoholic Duck_COM wrote:

You can counter 4 friends and wwk by attacking them.

Are you sure you wanted to quote me on this? Because I don't see a connection.

Yes. It is to the connection about they just want to play.

Alcoholic Duck_COM wrote:

You can counter 4 friends and wwk by attacking them. You croplock a friends cap thats 120-200k resources/parking gone for wwk or try to chief the wwk itself and the hammer is gone and thats your reward for attacking.

Invincible WWKs cant be countered. Even if you plan a train and 0 pop it the hammer stays so there is no reward and with alliance help it will bite you later.

Ah, I see we are back at editing posts AFTER someone responds to them. I've noticed it's popular with some people here.
Isn't it the same as you said, you just attack his friends and cut off his supply chain? The other wwk from your example can be saved too and with the help of alliance bite you later also. I don't see the difference. Could you explain more? I may be missing something.

Foregt attacking the friends in this scenario.

Consider 2 wwk accounts that you plan to attack. The goal is to destroy the wwk village.

First wwk have 25 other villages, second only have 1 village the wwk itself.

You attack the first guy, it maybe a chief or hammer train to do a 0 pop. If you succeed the hammer is forever gone. It cant bite you anywhere.

You attack the second guy, since its only one village it cant be chief attempt. You do a hammer train. You succeed. The village is 0 pop but the hammer is still alive and its going to bite.

This is considering you succeed in taking the arti in wwk village and completely destroying it.