Non registered IP multis being used via VPN.

  • The complaints about the cheaters/unethical players are real.

    I have reported several times that some players have 750,000 generals score without apparently running out of the measly 26 million gold they have.

    They either cheat or there is something seriously wrong with the rules.

    Those gen banks ruin the game for the honest players.

    I agree that a small rule change would solve these problems. Like suggested earlier, they should have to wait 24 hours after coming out of V-,mode before startting their nefarious business, or not be allowed to enter V-mode more than once a week.


    Is anyone listening ?


    Gibon

  • Yeah I was going to have to find time at some stage to do the ticket thing myself


    This thread is somewhat hard to find - sounds as though a few people letting off steam as well off topic


    Coupla things for the record:


    I am proud to have made friends in Kings and led Iranian Forces into battle against PGA - we went from underdog to a drawy win - it's a long story


    Iranian players were NOT skilled fighters when the servers merged (one or two exceptions) lots of those guys are now. In their old server they relied on generals banks and sheer weight of arms. The provenance of these banks was multi account cheating on a scale greater than you would believe. Techniques involve VPNS - hard IP alts i.e. one computer on line one, another on line two etc. Double manning especially Babak and Sepher who run the s007 revenge007 silv3r accounts amongst many more - very hard to catch two people off line!

    Other miscellaneous cheats and hacks. Babak in particular has the reputation of being the man to bring down the Iranian server - he has some strange destructive agenda at any cost using any method - remember the economy is not in great shape in that part of the world so what has been going on, particularly in the past server, were bot assisted players bulking up accounts for Futures Max then selling the account for real world money. This legacy of banks and multis then merged into .En and then registered multis became legit.


    Breaking News: Majid another gross and flagrant cheater is taking a break with many accounts


    Ok I'm rambling now - so the idea of post Vmode cooldown on sales is excellent - back in the day it was voted on in the suggestions forum and had I think a high vote of 140 or so with only a dozen against it


    There are military tactics to taking down the likes of Babak - but they also need combination with Diplomacy and Gameforge Technical (i.e. getting reports in to them - just not sure if the quick reports get looked at these days)


    Lol - Crow a troll? he's not good looking, but troll - no...


    Del

  • In many ways some of the enhancements that Ikariam have added to the game over the years has allowed the game to become unbalanced, while allowing players to operate within the rules. 2 key features I use within the rules are


    - IP sharing accounts. This allows a player to have many accounts dedicated to certain roles, which was not part of the games original design. This allows extreme account specialization to support other members of your alliance/side.


    - Black Market. It's hard to know where to start with this feature, but being able to transfer 10,000s of ships while using 1 unit of cargo space is the feature that breaks the game - it allows unlimited gold transfers and fleet movement all within the game rules and due to the wide spread between the min and max sales price you can transfer 100m+ gold via a two way trade ship transfer.


    As for fixes,


    I would propose that as v. mode has a minimum of 48 hours of activation time when entered it also gains 48 hours of delay from when you exit it. It is after all Vacation mode, not a 'free', 'unlimited' defence shield. Such a change would mean that all ship/army accounts would be open for at least 2 days every 30 days. This would cause large gold costs on the unit banks and open them up to attack from active server members. The result would be a balance imposed more by the player community and less by coded rules.


    The unlimited ship sales from the Black Market needs to also be fixed, maybe each ship could take up 1 units of cargo space, this would still allow the movement of a lot of ships but the purchaser will have to consider how they use their trade ships and the free speed boost which reduce cargo space.


    Reduce the pricing spread for ship sales and so the amount of gold that can be transferred. This change should only take place if the above changes also take place. Otherwise the current gold/ship banks will have a major game advantage for many months or even years.

  • Hello,

    I wouldn't like to discuss about the "ethical" gaming, but about the "fair" one, related just to the rules that GF defined for this game. As stated in some points by some of you, personally - as a player - I agree with you, probably some different rules about the piracy (or the banks size) could help to moderate competitive and ruthless players or alliances, and to keep the game more "balanced". Other aggressive and unscrupulous behaviours, like an ally that suddenly breaks treaties and attacks ex-allied, or building incredibly big general / gold banks, are part of the game, no matter if it can be considered "ethical" or not: it's inside the rules, so we obviously don't - and can't - intervene. If you want to discuss about the rules, then we can discuss - and this could be a good starting point - but if rules (or game mechanics) don't change, also our work will not change. I remind that it happened in the past, when GF decided to reduce dramatically the rewards at the end of the piracy rounds (thank to the complains from both players and Staff).


    About the server management, we have dozen of players kept under strict control (not only on Beta, obviously). We don't stop people just because we "know for sure" that they cheat (and not necessarily gibon there is something "seriously wrong with the rules"). We too have rules, because our work must be fair and unbiased, and who is banned is violating a rule on a objective basis. That's why someone is stopped earlier, someone later, but be sure that a cheating player - sooner or later - will be stopped. And your collaboration, in some cases, is really precious for us. For the sake of clarity, the 15 accounts stopped in last days are not related the first post of this thread: you don't know what we do, but be sure that - at least on our community - we know what you do.


    Finally, we don't mind it you are a paying player or not (apart the fact that we can't know it): the fact that a player buys Ambrosia does not give to him any special right. Regarding your particular case, The crow , for privacy reason I avoid to continue this discussion, but we both know what I'm talking about; anyway, be sure that I'll be very pleased if you decide to move all your future discussions to a more "proper" level than in the past, as it seems you're doing in this thread. [+1] for you, in this case.


    Kind regards

  • OLR you are a copy thinker :-) I was about to write something along those lines - that I can get 3000000 ships flatpacked into one cargo ship is a bit silly - especially when the GOs will do me for moving a single twig or a pebble badly - Sampisa will have a prepacked statement for this...


    stop vmode gens banks with a post vmode sales cooldown 12-48 hours- fp simples


    1 warship 1 cargo - fp simples


    wntl unless you are a cheat and guilty?


    Kindest Cuddliest Warmest Non Covid regards to all


    Del

  • Im glad to see that this topic has raised interest and resulted with shared views from several Beta members.

    It seems that there are common pain points and large degree of consensus among the shared posts.

    My view is similar, some recent changes in game rules and mechanics have taken a turn for the worse, making it easy to stay within game rules, but also degrade gaming experience for large portion of the gaming community. As the game evolves, it is common to find some not so good things along the way, that is why it is important to share experiences.


    For me personally, i would like to see how we can move this point forward, with the common goal of improving the game for everyone.

    Several proposals have been made, believe that some polishing and discussion is still required, but they all have a good point and would remedy the issues previously raised.


    Trying to be proactive and positive here - in case that a mutual view is achieved regarding aforementioned gold/gen banks and piracy, Sampisa can you please advise how to raise the proposal to be implemented in the game?


    BR
    Krizminjo

  • we are listening a lot

  • Welcome on board forum, Krizminjo :)


    Nothing in particular: as soon as a valid proposal is ready, we can submit it to GF. In the past we had an area where it was possible to define in detail a proposal, at https://board.en.ikariam.gamef…ard/620-Game-Suggestions/

    It could be a nice idea to revive that section on this forum too.


    Kind regards

  • in English idiom, Kind Regards, Warmest Regards, with greatest respect sign offs etc are now seen to be insincere platitudes


    40 years ago I learned the hard way in French saying to a very attractive young lady at her family dinner "Je te plait"


    her parents pissed themselves laughing and then explained


    it does not mean as I innocently thought have I made you happy - it's more along the lines of "do you want it now, baby!"


    also I caution against when getting a bit over heated from strenuous exercise from saying "ich bin warm" in germany


    that also means something along the lines of "I want it now buddy in the local lavatory"


    blimmin' forriners - noid to loon inglish moi luvver duck

  • Any time you introduce a new rule/item/particle/virus in a more or less stable environment the outcome will have unintended consequences, as the whole world is experiences now.


    So I think it is important that any change that may be made from this symposium should be limited to one rule change, so we can see if it has the desired effect that can be agreed on.

    Personally I would like to see the change in the 48hr limit v.mode as so well put by Olr-Relic. It is always a good idea to limit a single change to any experiment and then observe if it had the desired outcome.


    So if it is not out of order I would like to second that:

    I would propose that as v. mode has a minimum of 48 hours of activation time when entered it also gains 48 hours of delay from when you exit it. It is after all Vacation mode, not a 'free', 'unlimited' defence shield. Such a change would mean that all ship/army accounts would be open for at least 2 days every 30 days. This would cause large gold costs on the unit banks and open them up to attack from active server members. The result would be a balance imposed more by the player community and less by coded rules.

  • So I think it is important that any change that may be made from this symposium should be limited to one rule change, so we can see if it has the desired effect that can be agreed on

    One of the reasons for listing a number of changes was because a single change to the v-mode process would be game able for at least ship banks at the moment. With the way that the black market currently works for ships you would be able to transfer the whole of the fleet between 2 accounts on the same island within a few mins regardless of how large the fleet was. This means that 2 players keeping within the IP sharing rules would be able to flip-flop 2 ship banks in and out of v-mode.


    This only affects ship banks as gold banks are fully protected within the game anyway and troop banks are limited by the fact that each unit takes up cargo space.

  • The issue with having just the notice of 24, 48, or what ever hours notice for going v mode is it still allows ship banks to be used. One account can give the notice and then buy ships right before it enters v mode. I also think that GF won't go for no trading allowed for x amount of hours after coming out of v mode. Players may have run to v mode to hide from enemies and when they come back they may need to buy generals to defend themselves legally. However building on the no trading allowed you could implement a rule of no selling generals for x amount of hours after coming out of v mode. Still allows players to enter and exit v mode at will and properly be able to buy resources to defend themselves as needed whenever needed. While this would still allow general banks to exist it makes them almost non usable and just for show thus helping return balance to the game for normal players who don't cheat.

  • Gen banks.

    The 48 hour ban on trades could kick in if your gen is higher then a set number like say 50,000.

    Honest players like myself and others who have been fighting these guys for at least 8 or 10 years can build ships and troops very fast because we fight guys with half a million gens or more.

    We have dealt with it for many many years by building huge barracks and shipyards capable of making a lot of gens but only till the population or sulpher runs dry.

    Nothing more frustrating then bringing down a gen score of 800,000 in the course of a couple weeks only to see it go back to half a million in the blink of an eye.

    Many times I allmost gave up all my accounts as the game seemed unplayable and with a trade ban on v.moded gen banks I can honestly say they would not stand a chance as they rely on these banks(sometimes run by them and vpn) and we rely on alliance help to fight these bullies and thats the proper word for them.


    They add nothing to the game and have contributed to many people leaving including their own members when they would not allow these cheaters to use their towns. They have even told friendly farmers if they did not allow access to their towns they would turn them into farms and make them pay a tax to not be pillaged.


    Deliverance can confirm this as I shared the circ with him.


    Anyways good to see some go's are at least noticing this is a problem now and maybe we can find a mutual agreement to stopping these gen banks that add ZERO value to the game and contribute to it's demise including paying customers and yes,lots of people use ambro.

    As owner of my own company I know that the people paying the bills are to be listened to when they have a problem be it right or wrong. If I ever told any of the people I contract for that they were trolls I would be out of business.


    My 2 cents.lets fix this.


    Crow,zig

  • The issue with having just the notice of 24, 48, or what ever hours notice for going v mode is it still allows ship banks to be used. One account can give the notice and then buy ships right before it enters v mode. I also think that GF won't go for no trading allowed for x amount of hours after coming out of v mode. Players may have run to v mode to hide from enemies and when they come back they may need to buy generals to defend themselves legally. However building on the no trading allowed you could implement a rule of no selling generals for x amount of hours after coming out of v mode. Still allows players to enter and exit v mode at will and properly be able to buy resources to defend themselves as needed whenever needed. While this would still allow general banks to exist it makes them almost non usable and just for show thus helping return balance to the game for normal players who don't cheat.

    If your v.moding because a pga bully with half a million gens is taking over your island then the last thing you are gonna do is come out of v.mode and buy enough gens to counter because it's impossible anyways.

    Unless you have access to your own gold and gen banks it aint gonna happen period. You stand no chance as well as all your island mates.

  • Any time you introduce a new rule/item/particle/virus in a more or less stable environment the outcome will have unintended consequences, as the whole world is experiences now.


    So I think it is important that any change that may be made from this symposium should be limited to one rule change, so we can see if it has the desired effect that can be agreed on.

    Fully agree on that.

    It is hardly possible to predict all outcomes of any change, it is just human nature to explore, adapt and use available game options to the full extent. Therefore test period is strongly recommended, and small steps used.

    Most of issues can be solved with simple and elegant fixes, not really introducing major changes to game rules, and would leave large part of community unaffected. Such as the buffer time between entering end exiting vacation mode. Seems like a good proposal, but still discussion in a larger forum is required to get momentum and attention. Hopefully we can make a start here and then expand it to the next level.

  • The issue with having just the notice of 24, 48, or what ever hours notice for going v mode is it still allows ship banks to be used. One account can give the notice and then buy ships right before it enters v mode. I also think that GF won't go for no trading allowed for x amount of hours after coming out of v mode.

    Yes, it will still be possible, but what is the cost/benefit ratio in this case?

    Gen bank by default has a large negative cash flow, and such a change would make existence of a gen bank unattractive.

    My view is that this is the direction that should be used - not to stop using any existing valid game mechanism, but reduce negative exploit by simply making it difficult to use.

  • No two ways about it - it is bonkers to be able to fit this into a single cargo ship - but every now and then I have to fight fire with fire and my regular rapid builders are getting exhausted

  • In Beta there is one totally legitimately derived home grown big bank I think - all the rest were spawned by illicit multis bots and such in the defunct Iranian server - post merge they had a free pass as multis were now alright subject to some restrictions, registration, cap on number etc


    It does astound me that GOs/GF can get so focused on petty piracy and accidental pebble pushes and maintain with a straight face that two simple black market fixes would not be worthwhile i.e.


    Warships take cargo space

    Sales have a cooldown post vmode 12 24 48 hours any of these - post vmode purchases unaffected for now


    Whenever I get time and remember I try and file a quick report if I see something suspicious that might leave a trace of unusual activity IPs shifting around between accounts - accounts being dropped from registration then registered as linked a few hours later - accounts that show 24/7 activity for days on end indicating double handling or more with players sharing login data to cover eachother to sleep


    Nothing I have currently warrants a ticket with screen shots of the offender - the GOs have all the forensic tools to show play patterns that would be suspicious and justify closer inspection - I just hope quick reports are used to alert them to the slim possibility that there's a bit of wholesale systemic cheating going on; Babak and Sepher are very good at it too. Majid not so good for the moment anyway


    And then there is the obvious - I can say and remain humble-ish I am high in the rankings of fight capability - when I and powerful allies can be beaten to a pulp by one supposed player (yeah right) running legit accounts (yeah right) there is something damn fishy going on - imagine if you were a ten second 100 metre sprinter and on the day someone else does it twice as fast as anyone else, eyebrows would be more than raised!


    The real shame of it is Babak etc are also fine fighters meticulous in their tasks and waves. As with almost all of my former enemies (Crow took a decent battering) we are now friends as I am with many in Kings alliance. Babak I think will never be in that category he is intent on destruction, motivation unknown.


    Cheers


    Del