Posts by User12996

Quote from Morphias

Quote from User12996

That sawmill is 37. Even if someone matched my donations, the Sawmill is only 40 which is a difference of 1072-964=108 wood/hour so we're getting very excited about something minor.

Luky's earlier one is 32, but doubled is 35 for a difference of 894-790=104.

Don't get me wrong, I do want people to contribute more, but I don't believe this kind of bonus is the right way to do it.

I agree the benefits vs the amount of donations are not much as we get to higher levels but I think it then just becomes more of a matter of " Principle " of being a Leach .

This has been a problem/Complaint since I started playing back in March of 2008, and here we are 18+ years later and the same problem/Complaint is still here.

Display More

Yeah, I was just wondering why I was never bothered by it. I just built my own mines and if someone showed up, as long as they aren't causing trouble, it was whatever, but also when we first started playing we waited for everyone to go inactive and slowly consolidated control of the island. It took a long time.

Also here's the other reason I don't see it as big of a deal. That sawmill is 37. Even if someone matched my donations, the Sawmill is only 40 which is a difference of 1072-964=108 wood/hour so we're getting very excited about something minor.

Luky's earlier one is 32, but doubled is 35 for a difference of 894-790=104.

Don't get me wrong, I do want people to contribute more, but I don't believe this kind of bonus is the right way to do it. Even the game tries to nudge you to do it with the favor system, too.

I honestly found one of the better examples here:

But I've always taken it as one of those it is what it is things. It's my job to build up the mines.

Quote from Luky

Quote from DooMDr

Mantenere il sistema attuale invariato potrebbe avvantaggiare significativamente alcuni giocatori che sanno come sfruttarne le meccaniche.

Ecco come funziona il processo per sfruttare il sistema:

1. Il giocatore A crea un piccolo account secondario (Account little a) , dichiara la condivisione dell'IP (per mantenere tutto legale) e acquista una grande quantità di Ambrosia. Alcuni giocatori, a quanto pare, acquistano Ambrosia a prezzi regionali molto più bassi, come ad esempio i prezzi turchi.
2. Il giocatore B fa lo stesso , creando un piccolo account secondario (Account b), dichiarando la condivisione dell'indirizzo IP e acquistando Ambrosia.
3. Il giocatore A sposta una città dall'Account a sull'isola (o sulle isole) del giocatore B. L'Account a dona quindi la massima quantità possibile di risorse tramite donazioni di ambrosia alla miniera e alla foresta dell'isola.
4. Il piccolo conto a va al cimitero e successivamente viene riportato indietro. Ciò consente di ripetere il processo di donazione: il conto ritorna, dona di nuovo, torna al cimitero e così via.
5. Ripetendo questo ciclo , il giocatore A può contribuire con enormi quantità di risorse all'isola del giocatore B, potenzialmente portando la miniera e la foresta a livelli superiori a 60.
6. Il giocatore B ricambia quindi il favore , utilizzando l'Account b per ripetere lo stesso processo sull'isola del giocatore A.

Volete vedere le prove di come funziona? Controllate la classifica delle donazioni sul vostro server e osservate lo stato dei principali donatori. Scoprirete che molti sono inattivi e sembrano destinati a essere dimenticati. Alcuni poi ritornano e riprendono a donare. Monitorando questi account nel tempo, si può notare uno schema ricorrente di inattività, trasferimenti di account dimenticati, ritorni e donazioni ingenti. Sebbene questo da solo non dimostri uno sfruttamento deliberato, solleva legittimi interrogativi su come il sistema venga utilizzato.

Il risultato è che entrambi i giocatori finiscono per avere isole notevolmente potenziate grazie all'uso ripetuto di queste meccaniche, ottenendo così un vantaggio sostanziale rispetto ai giocatori che sviluppano le proprie isole attraverso i contributi normali.

.

Il problema non è tanto ciò che fanno i singoli giocatori, quanto piuttosto se il sistema stesso crei un vantaggio sleale.

Display More

Oh my God!

I hadn’t thought of that.

But then, all the more so, if donations were intended to provide a return of resources directly only to those who had donated, it would break the system…

I’d just thought that, at present, the system favoured multi-account users, especially the illegal ones.

Display More

Anyone who isn't playing by the rules generally has an advantage. Legal multis are fine, there's nothing stopping you from making your own, too, or even having a friend stay on your island and donate.

When I was a kid, I'd have my grandparents play Ikariam. I helped them get to 7 cities, then my grandma would log on every day, ship wine around, and donate wood while she had her morning coffee and watched the news. I also had classmates from school play, I'd help them with their homework and they'd just have to donate wood lol

I tried to recruit everyone I knew.

What is your point, Luky? Do you want me to make an account on Ares so I can donate to your islands?

Quote from Luky

Let's talk seriously and not joke around...

If I hadn't donated on my islands, I would have disappeared or stayed at 200,000 points.

There are very few of my islands where other players donate.

The real truth is that many players have grown thanks to my donations and thanks to the ambrosia I PURCHASED... while they most likely have never purchased any themselves...

But that’s fine with you...

That said, I’m in favor, you’re against it.

The end

Display More

I've been serious the entire time. Everyone complains because they can't coordinate with anyone else on how to do donations. And because they can't coordinate donations, they want to simply make donations more like a single player game which is ridiculous. Work on coordinating with other people.

Quote from Luky

For you, everything is simple and easy,

but it doesn't always work that way.

There are many strong players you can't beat.

They often have large alliances that protect them.

And anyway, given the huge number of players who don't donate, you'd be forced to fight all the time—even if you don't feel like it—while they grow stronger thanks to your donations...

You can also choose not to donate if you believe everyone is taking advantage of you.

Quote from Luky

Quote from User12996

I don't understand because the game already has so many things you can do to someone who doesn't donate. Do they have wood they aren't donating? You can pillage them. Do they have no resources? You can blockade them and wine starve them. If they're on a wine island? You can blockade them and prevent them from building.

It would mean being FORCED to constantly fight those who don’t donate, every time you log in, without a break… and being FORCED to stop playing your own game…

There are far too many players who don’t donate!!!

What’s more, they DON’T INTERACT AT ALL!!!

They don’t usually chat… they don’t reply to messages

Then spy and pillage them and tell them the attacks will continue until the donations improve.

Quote from Morphias

Quote from User12996

The whole point of my post is that the game gives you a variety of mechanisms to punish players for not contributing. I don't believe we should have a mechanism that is effectively donate or else.

I disagree with your assessment

• There is NO punishment
• Nothing is being taken away -- you still get the normal amount of resources if you do not donate as much as the BIG donors

There is a BONUS for those who donate more than others

Correct, but the entire point of the bonus is to create a donations arms race which undermines the entire point of donations. At that point, we might as well simply take the costs of upgrading each mine, divide them by 16, and make the mines personal.

And by providing a conditional bonus you are taking it away from other players if they don't donate. Currently, they get the same amount from the mills as you do, regardless of what they've donated.

I don't understand because the game already has so many things you can do to someone who doesn't donate. Do they have wood they aren't donating? You can pillage them. Do they have no resources? You can blockade them and wine starve them. If they're on a wine island? You can blockade them and prevent them from building.

But instead of engaging with other players we want a passive solution that says "if you don't donate, I get a bonus".

Suggestions like this are designed around taking a game that is built around cooperation and turning it into more and more a single player experience. A huge part of the game is working with other people to develop the mines on an island together and you simply want to jettison that because you don't want to use the other tools the game has given you to coordinate with other people.

The whole point of my post is that the game gives you a variety of mechanisms to punish players for not contributing. I don't believe we should have a mechanism that is effectively donate or else.

Should I be mad about this? It's part of the game. Guess what, if I wanted to punish them, I can attack them.

Quote from Luky

Quote from User12996

Quote from Luky

Quote from User12996

Disagree. It's a collective action problem and should remain as such without additional incentives.

How can you say . it’s a problem of collective action and should remain as such without additional incentives !!!

But do you have any idea how many players I have on my islands across both servers I play on who’ve never donated anything ???

It’s not about giving more incentives ; it’s about giving everyone their fair share !!

It’s all about getting away from multiple accounts !!

https://postimg.cc/WDh3JvL8

Display More

It's a solution in search of a problem. There's little issue with the game being designed this way and the collective action problem makes it interesting. By collective action it means that the best choice for individuals is simply not to donate but that hurts the collective when it would be better for everyone to cooperate.

As soon as you add some kind of penalty for not participating, you strip away the collective action problem and simply have created a mandatory donation system which is boring.

Display More

As if the game were super exciting and captivating!!

Ikariam is boring, too...

Even moving wine is boring

Even building structures gets boring in the end

So what???

If you want to play, you do it anyway, and in the end, you obviously enjoy it...

So I don’t see what’s wrong with making an effort to donate in order to get resources.

Then, once you’ve reached a satisfactory production level, you just stop donating...

Display More

You're either misunderstanding or misrepresenting what I'm saying.

You're trying to create a penalty system that is basically "donate to the island or else."

First, if you read the full suggestion you get a 100% bonus if you have donated 100% of the wood. That means it is incentivizing you to be the sole donator to an island because you'd get a 2x bonus. No amount of mine upgrades will be better than a 2x bonus.

Second, the entire point of the game is that you're supposed to either coordinate with your alliance or communicate with other players to help donate to your mines. A bonus for donating to the mine eliminates the incentive you have to engage with other players to work towards a goal.

In fact, it would make more sense to make the mines and wonders individualized instead of island shared, but that undermines the cooperation aspect of the game.

Quote from Luky

Quote from User12996

Disagree. It's a collective action problem and should remain as such without additional incentives.

How can you say . it’s a problem of collective action and should remain as such without additional incentives !!!

But do you have any idea how many players I have on my islands across both servers I play on who’ve never donated anything ???

It’s not about giving more incentives ; it’s about giving everyone their fair share !!

It’s all about getting away from multiple accounts !!

https://postimg.cc/WDh3JvL8

Display More

It's a solution in search of a problem. There's little issue with the game being designed this way and the collective action problem makes it interesting. By collective action it means that the best choice for individuals is simply not to donate but that hurts the collective when it would be better for everyone to cooperate.

As soon as you add some kind of penalty for not participating, you strip away the collective action problem and simply have created a mandatory donation system which is boring.

Disagree. It's a collective action problem and should remain as such without additional incentives.

I also support this and mentioned this a while back. No reason we can't do attack/armor upgrades for the wall, too.

Quote from Chuck "Bee" Bashlick

During server merging, donations are transferred to your inventory and accompany you to the new server.

Is there an upper limit?

A player who reported that their donation was deficient from their inventory received a response from the ticket system stating that "it was sent automatically and cannot be altered."

Another player stated that a maximum of 4.29G (i.e., 4,290,000,000) of raw materials were added to the inventory, with the remaining amount being deleted.

Is it true that there is a limit?

badidol  lagu

Display More

I was randomly thinking about this and wondered if it was some kind of limit. It is: uint32. I ended up writing a bug about it here: [Bug Report] Graveyard (Asphodel) Migration Caps Free Donation Wood Balance at 32-bit Integer Limit (uint32)

I probably should've written it up 6 months ago, but, well, today's the day.

If you can add any information in the thread, it's appreciated, as well as referring it to the person who experienced it.

Component / System: Account Migration / Asphodel Graveyard Script / Server Merges

Severity: Major (Permanent loss of massive amounts of player resources/progress upon transfer)

Summary of the Issue

When an account is sent to the Graveyard (Asphodel) server or undergoes a server merge, the total historical wood donations from all islands are compiled to be refunded to the player as "free donation wood." However, the script handling this transfer utilizes a 32-bit unsigned integer (uint32) for the temporary allocation variable or the "free wood" account field.

As a result, if a player's total lifetime raw wood donations exceed 4,294,967,295 units, any amount above this threshold is permanently truncated/deleted during the migration. Meanwhile, the player's global High Score (which calculates 0.01 points per 100 wood) remains correct, creating a discrepancy between the scoreboard and the actual refundable wood balance.

Expected Behavior
The migration script should utilize a 64-bit integer (uint64) or a data type matching the core game database to ensure 100% of a player’s historical island donations are successfully transferred and refunded as free wood, regardless of how high the number is.

Actual Behavior

The total raw wood balance hits a hard mathematical ceiling at exactly 4,294,967,295. Any wood donated beyond this number disappears from the account's refundable "free wood" wallet upon landing on a new server.

Steps to Reproduce (for QA)

1. Prepare a Test Account: Create or modify an account on an internal QA or the public test server and distribute massive donations across multiple islands (e.g., using developer tools or testing environments to simulate high-end gameplay). Ensure the cumulative sum of raw wood donated across all islands exceeds the 32-bit limit—for example, 5,000,000,000 raw wood.
2. Verify High Score: Confirm that the global High Score correctly reflects the total amount (5 billion wood should display as roughly 50,000,000 points on the scoreboard).
3. Trigger Graveyard/Migration: Trigger the inactivity/ghosting script to send the account to the Asphodel (Graveyard) server, or execute a standard server merge script on the account.
4. Log into New Server: Select a destination server and revive the account.
5. Check Refundable Balance: Look at the available "Free Wood" donation balance.
   • Observed Result: The available free wood balance will be exactly 4,294,967,295, and the remaining 705,032,705 wood is completely missing.

Technical Analysis for Developers

The Root Cause: The main game loop and high-score databases handle these numbers correctly (likely by tracking points or utilizing 64-bit data structures). However, the legacy migration script that aggregates individual island lines (SUM(island_donations)) dumps the total into a uint32 variable or updates a uint32 column in the temporary migration database.

The Fix: Update the variable data type inside the graveyard/migration script from a 32-bit integer to a 64-bit integer (uint64 or BIGINT depending on the database architecture) to prevent data truncation.

I support this.

Quote from EdynohE

Quote from UMBRA

Quote from EdynohE

Quote from UMBRA

I am not sure this is true though. So you are saying that you cannot transfer an account from a Turkish server to another country`s server?

Yes, that is the new announcement we’ve received. An update is coming, and we will no longer be able to transfer from Türkiye servers to any other server. Likewise, players from other countries won't be able to transfer to our servers. No exact date has been given yet.

Why though? lol

And where did the announcement come from?

Yaş Doğrulama Sistemi Hakkında

Here is the link to the announcement; age verification is cited as the reason, but it seems illogical to me as a basis for separating the servers.

Display More

Not really, they probably don't want to implement it across all servers.

Quote from UMBRA

Do we know how soon 17.6.0 will come?

It's here.

Also, it's pretty clear this is because of Turkey's age verification requirement.