Should Anti-rape be Removed?

[Silence]

I strongly support the idea that solo should not be a main part of the game. I find it ridiculous that one player can perform better than an entire alliance. Logic would dictate that 15 players should be able to beat 1 player.

The main reason for bringing this up is AR abuse. I’ve attacked solos where they have not been able to save their acres so they send units so that government defence comes to their rescue. The most recent one for me I was sending a flak attack on a PoM and he got his friend to send small droids at him on my tick so police would come. That player’s nick is "The-Super-Fly".
I am not saying that all solos do this it is that the select few of solo players ruin it for majority and tarnish the entire reputation.

I feel that removing AR will benefit the game as it will therefore create more of a community. Instead of having players on their own because its easier to rely on government defence it will encourage to move to an alliance so that the player can receive some defence.

Finally, organised solo groups. This is a touchy topic so Ill be brief. You guys have systematically destroyed the "middle ranking" type of alliance. Apart from competitive groups the activity below ~#4 alliance value is poor. Why? Solos bash these alliances and the alliance cannot hit back quite as effectively as the solos spend their time making sure that they trigger SAS on each other


Based on these opinions I think that AR should be removed!

Thank you


::Edit:: Please don't vote unless you can express your opinion

 

[Enrico]

Re: Should Anti-rape be Removed?

I second that notion.

Soloplay should be for the chronically inactive who realy just like to goof around a bit, or for a select few who choose route and playingstyle very carefully

I propose that AR is replaced with:
High insurance! (not injuries, insurance, so the solo can rebuy when he get online.) Im thinking 85% or something like that. (the loss of seeds is then partly compensated)
Max landings pr day. With injuries back in place, there must be a way to make sure an unfortunate solo is not raped dry. I suggest that within 24 hours a solo can max loose land on three ticks. After the third tick with landloss noone can steal more acres within a 24 hour period.

If all attackers get full steal (i.e. no landcap) that means a maximum of 40% acres (or to be precise: 15+12,75+10,8375= 38,5875%)

A wise solo would then stay land lean and as little inviting as possible.
And when the solo gets online again: He will have a considerable amount of staff compared to acres, and be able to start stealing land back if he so chooses.

 

[tobapopalos]

Re: Should Anti-rape be Removed?

Ya.

Make it so everyone (other than the crazy or the bored) has to play in alliance. People can go solo if they want, but they should be prepared to get their asses kicked. Bring back ally play!

 

[Mysterious]

Re: Should Anti-rape be Removed?

Yes. As I've just griped about it lol. The way solo's use the government AR as a means of being totally protected from land loss is ludicrous. AR is not meant to be at the beck and call of a solo!! It's meant to be as a way to protect them from an overwhelming force. Seeing as any force that has the remotest chance of landing is overwhelming to the solo's who abuse AR, it might as well be removed.

 

[BlackWolf]

Re: Should Anti-rape be Removed?

Woo not my fault this time!
Woo f0xx you made it!

To topic...
REMOVE AR!

 

[Steve_God]

Re: Should Anti-rape be Removed?

I voted remove as it was the nearest option...

All that needs doing is for it to be watered down so that it really is to stop mass bashing, and not just a 'larger than usual' attack.

 

[TheNamelessWonder]

Re: Should Anti-rape be Removed?

Absolutely not. While this is *primarily* an alliance-based game, solos are important to the game as well. Solo vs allied needs to be balanced. Solos do not need to be nerfed into oblivion.

 

[tobapopalos]

Re: Should Anti-rape be Removed?

Absolutely not. While this is *primarily* an alliance-based game, solos are important to the game as well. Solo vs allied needs to be balanced. Solos do not need to be nerfed into oblivion.

For solos and allies to be balanced, solos do need to be nerfed into oblivion.

 

[Cyrus]

Re: Should Anti-rape be Removed?

i voted no, but not because i dont want solo's nerf'd rather taking away anti rape isnt the rightway around it, but removing certain aspects such as Psolo.

 

[No-Dachi]

Re: Should Anti-rape be Removed?

Yes. Unless it's tweaked a lot then it should be removed. Right now the solos are destroying the game.

 

[CLem]

Re: Should Anti-rape be Removed?

I vote yes as it is the most appropriate for now, AR with pnap and injury is far too benefitial for solos that are active. But if solos are actually solo (no pnaps) then they should have AR, so that people like me that don't have a pnap and are inactive just in here for a laugh and provide some land and action for the game can stay on playing.

 

[Chezz]

Re: Should Anti-rape be Removed?

But if solos are actually solo (no pnaps) then they should have AR, so that people like me that don't have a pnap and are inactive just in here for a laugh and provide some land and action for the game can stay on playing.

I vote no, because as clem just said, as long as we remove pnaps from solos, solos can be an option for inactive or lazy people (like me), and AR at most needs a few tweaks IMO....

 

[moorer]

Re: Should Anti-rape be Removed?

I do not see how removing AR is going to do anything other than lose more players from the playerbase.

The issue is not the existence of AR itself but rather the deliberate triggering of AR by a small majority of solo players who do not have the skill levels to survive as a true "solo" player.

Its interesting that most of the anti AR comments are from players who tend to play at the higher end of the rankings where they are more likely to come up against those higher ranked solo players who know how to use AR to their advantage (and no I am not accusing all top ranked solo's of cheating, some of them are truly up there simply on ability!!)

Removing AR completely from all solos will simply drive those who are not prepared to sit at their PC's 5+ hours a day ( which is what alliance play really requires) to look elsewhere for entertainment.

I believe we could lose the "Pure Solo" option without any major damage to the game but I still believe there is a place for PNAP's and AR.

 

[tobapopalos]

Re: Should Anti-rape be Removed?

Well...I'm all for getting rid of AR completely, but apparently this is an unrealistic demand (/me grumbles).

So maybe these two could be brought in as alternatives. Make the AR modifier drop much quicker than it does at present, maybe 0.3% a tick rather than 0.1%. This way solos can't hide behind a high AR mod for days.

Also, make solos decide between having pnaps (or possibly just one) or having AR.

These changes along with the abolition of P-solo and a change to the way AR units target (so deliberately triggering AR is ineffective) should be enough of a nerf to discourage people from going solo.

 

[harriergirl]

Re: Should Anti-rape be Removed?

solo should be solo, just that... no pnaps, no AR with the option to buy mega insurance,

psolo should be removed, AR is just another abusable system that's broken

 

[Max]

Re: Should Anti-rape be Removed?

AR should not be removed. Just because a few people trigger deliberately does not mean the game should be ruined for the rest of the playerbase (such as inactive players like myself).

I believe that there needs to be a solution that punishes those who trigger AR. Perhaps a system that will only fire upon the triggering culprit? The problem is trying to write a code that will work out who's to blame. Perhaps any mob that is sent to attack that is under eta 5? But then a pure lethal attack on a solo can be triggered. It's difficult to solve, but removing AR is not the solution.

Perhaps PS should be removed and normal solo play improved slightly to compensate. But this does not solve the problem of AR triggering.

 

[tobapopalos]

Re: Should Anti-rape be Removed?

AR should not be removed. Just because a few people trigger deliberately does not mean the game should be ruined for the rest of the playerbase (such as inactive players like myself).

I don't think you quite understand. This round there are practically no alliances in the top rankings. All our targets are solos, apart from a couple in my 30% range (which I would rather not hit). For the last couple of weeks, I haven't even bothered to check if my targets are solo or not. There is an absolutely massive score gap between the top couple of alliances and those ranked 5-10. A few rounds ago there were at least 10 decent alliances, all full and with active members. Now there are very few. All those players who made up the rank 5-10 alliances have decided it's not worth it and have gone solo. It is not the dirty tactics of solos that are ruining the game, but the mere existence of the solos in the first place. So to bring back the alliances, we have to try and move these players from being solos to being allied. And the best way to do that is to make solo play much harder. At the moment it is just too easy to do well as a solo, and much harder to survive in a middle-ranking alliance. From what I've seen, these alliances just get buttfucked by solo groups all the time nowadays.

 

[Illumination]

Re: Should Anti-rape be Removed?

I think you will lose a lot of players if you take away AR. I do think that triggering is abused. I think that the game needs to take a look at how that can be handled, rather than take away AR.

Maybe when a solo target is launched on, anyone else that doesnt launch that same tick cant attack until the battle is at attacking for 3....so that if well calculated, the attacker can still land..if he oversends, AR goes off...but no one else can trigger by sending later. Incoming defense, ofc, should still be permitted. Not a thought out idea at all...but the problem is AR triggering, not AR the way it was intended.

 

[00micbro1998]

Re: Should Anti-rape be Removed?

I'm solo

And i've been hit many times,

was nilled, then had about 8 waves of geos at me.

Lost nearly all my acres.

I know 12 ticks i get some of my troops back, but for those 12 ticks im open to be geo'd. Your calling about trying to get rid of AR?

Yes AR can be seen unfair, if your hitting someone and they get AR. But unless that person has just been bashed, your probably hitting 30%50% your target. Finding a target with enough chance to withstand your attack should be encouraged.

A differernt system of AR mod, maybe be benefitial. For instance, the 1.5 values etc being different depending on what percentage your having. IE if your hitting someone 31% then u sending a mob should trigger AR easier, than someelse hitting your target who is 81%. I beleive this would make the game fairer for people who can't dedicate 6-10 hours a day, and new players coming into the game.

Like i said at the top of this post i was mithered when one player 3x my score nilled me, then loads of newbies land raped me. Maybe AR should hit 99% and drop 1% a tick until the injured troops return and the solo is at least able to try defend.

I am in agreeal that trigger anti rape intentionally is unfair, but how can it be monitored?

You might hit a solo, i might hit, (i might not have spy) trigger AR. It's still triggered though unintentially. If you send eta 5 for land, i might send eta 4 with cloners how can it be monitored. How can you seperate the intentional / with the accidental?

 

[tobapopalos]

Re: Should Anti-rape be Removed?

Maybe when a solo target is launched on, anyone else that doesnt launch that same tick cant attack until the battle is at attacking for 3....so that if well calculated, the attacker can still land..if he oversends, AR goes off...but no one else can trigger by sending later.

This could be easily abused by friends sending 1 troop to attack the solo constantly, so no proper attacks can be launched.