Is it poss to make it so the player who becomes the second,third,ect to attack a player thus causing the gangbanging situation to only have 50% of the att/deff they would normally have, It sounds daft but it will stop ppl teaming up .

This wont work in clan games.... (or would it ...????)

Define 1st. First to attack you full stop, or 1st each turn?

If 1st full stop,
I'm about to be attacked. So, I engineer someone else to attack one of my units first (e.g. stick it in a really annoying place, stopping a player taking over a gold mine). That player becomes the 1st player to attack me, but doesn't actually attack me any more. Now my real enemy has had his attack and defence halved. Great!

If 1st each turn, then it's a race to see which of my attackers logs on first to get the 100% att/def. (Although this is offset by not being able to pull a double turn)

I don't think it will work.

Im thinking it should last more than one turn, maybe even as much as five turns, the same as the time to repair something after an attack

Yes, so it will enable someone to effectively dealy being attacked for 5 turns, then possibly another 5, etc etc.

That is all well and good until it gets down to the last 3 players. I will often offer the other 2 players a 2v1 against me.
Lets say its a 10 player map and I have 6 castles and they have 4 between them it wouldn't be fair for those 2 players to have their attack downgraded when im at full strength.
Just something to think about.
cheers Angie

Yes, with all the different possibilities explaining why 2 players may engage in some hostilities with each other, gang banging has to be handled by people playing the campaign.

In my experience, the "court of consensus" that exists at the moment is fair, until the point when there is only 3 players left, because then the majority of the jurors are also the accused and the executioners.

so double teaming is allowed when there are only 3 players left in the game? another hidden rule i was unaware of! thats gangbanging in my opinion...

*jots down in lil black book... princess is part time gangbanger!

She meant if there are 3 players and one is far ahead of the other two combined, then SHE wil allow them to gang up on her. That doesn't make her a gangbanger. Please read carefully before posting. Thank you.

lol...i know that mog...i was just kidding!

I couldn't tell. I have no sense of humor. I am half dog, y'know.

This was only an idea, There must be away of making gangbanging unattractive to do.How would it work if the game checks if a player is being gangbanged by checking the deff records and then gives more deff % to that player

How about a popup msg informing that the player they are about to attack is already in conflict with another player, this would inform those that dont read the game news of what they are about to do .

If we can come up with somthing like this, then it will be ok to team up as you would know the punishment.

Expand..

Meh, there is no reason to read these threads carefully. Its all the same wah wah wah. I am proud of princess for crossing over the to the dark side. Finally her name isn't completely oxymoronic

What dark side would that be?
I will make it clear here and now if I believe ANY player is deliberately gangbanging in a game that I am in ,I will ask my opponent to go on hold while I assist the culprit.
Teaming up wont ever be stamped out because there are way too many variables,but that's not to say that it needs to be let run rampant like a hoard of feral cats.
just on another note on the same subject,when I first started playing this game ...I think my second game or so ,there was 3 players left and they were double teaming me so I asked Req if this was normal practice ,his reply went something like this:
If there are 3 players left there is no such thing as teaming up as the third player cant be expected to sit there and wait for the game to end naturally while the other 2 players gain experience points and leave you back in third spot,in his opinion and he is the game creator he thinks that when there are 3 players left anyone is fair bait.
Thoughts anyone?

i do have some thoughts on that... if there are only three players left...and two players team up on the top ranked player...ITS GANGBANGING...YOU ARE TEAMING UP ON A PERSON THAT WORKED HARD TO GET IN THAT POSITION...its not fair...period...now i am jotting princess down in my gangbangers black book...

"when there are 3 players left anyone is fair bait"

not true...this will only lead to friends teaming up against an individual they don't know or don't like...

this is exactly why i don't like to participate in camps... there are simply too many silent rules and guidlines to follow... the only way to make it totally fair is to prevent ppl from attacking more than one player...or section off the map...player one fights against player 2...3 against 4.... then gates open and let the winners face off...like a ladder....problem is...too many inactives/quitters...

Simon just to keep your thoughts in order ,these were Req's words not my words (read carefully and don't try to speed read if you cant do it accurately) ,just be careful before you accuse me of anything that im not guilty of,Now Simon stop trying to flamebait me....what is flamebait you ask?
Flamebait: Posts that are made with the aim of angering someone indirectly. Not outright flame, but still liable to bring angry replies. Flame baiting is a far more subtle and covert action; it is an underhanded tactic that is designed to provoke a response from another player. It's in the same context of trolling but with flame baiting it's just the one person.
In recent times Mog and I have discretely sorted out many multiple accounts/gang-bangers (most of which only Mog and I know who they are/were) in an attempt to make this site and its members abide by the rules that they agreed to when they joined up.
Cheers Angie

Shall we get back on topic now?

you asked for thoughts... i shared mine... and if you or anyone else teams up on a player... its gangbanging! doesn't really matter how many players are left in the game... anytime two players attack one...its gang banging...

there really is no need to define flamebaiting... i wasn't trying to anger anyone indirectly... just you... directly! just as you have when you jotted me down as a gangbanger in your lil black book! and for what? for saying if i'm heading in a direction i'll take over mines etc... according to your rules...if i'm heading at someones castle or resources...all they have to do is start a conflict with someone else and my strategies/plans are out the window... thats bs

and btw...i could careless who the gangbangers are... or who sorts through accounts... i don't play camps... because there are too many hidden rules to follow...especially yours!

you asked for thoughts...i shared mine... nothing more
have a nice day folks!

Last Edited : Saturday, 27 February 2010 - 08:17

And so the fighters retire to their corners, crowd raging! Round one has passed the bell rings! Round Two!

@simonsaydie - Princess saying "I'm in the lead, why don't you two both team up on me?" is not gang-banging, it's a threesome.
@Princess - I think this is what simon meant by your dark side has come out - you asked two opponents for a threesome.

Back to topic please, how can we discourage gang-banging?

My thought is it's best left for the players to sort out on a per-incident basis, that way everything can be taken into consideration. Any attempt to do it through the game mechanics will suffer and sometimes penalize the wrong person.