Posts by -Aquila-

Quote from AT Barbarossa

Quote from -Aquila-

Some players enjoy the playstyle of sniping entire fleets within minutes. The defender usually doesnt like having to monitor the game 24/7 to avoid getting sniped. Personally, I think the interaction between 5/5 carriers and paddles vs 0/0 rockets, carriers, and paddles is a little too strong, and Im not sure if this is healthy for the game.

If you use subs, there is more possibility now to lose only 2 subs instead of 4. This should mitigate fakes.

In other words if you want to mitigate fake you have to invest all you have only in paddle attacks and subs armour, and avoid using rockets at all.

Still better avoid to keep fleet at all.

Display More

I think this is bad game design, if the viable counter-strategies to an annoying military tactic are to either not play at all, or to focus all your investments into one or two single units.

I have played around with snipes for some time, I have had my fun with the tactic, but I decided to stop, because this is clearly not healthy for the game. There is no way that a game which is played over decades should allow you to burn an entire fleet within minutes, by avoiding regular round durations.

Imo, Gameforge should look to balance this aspect of the new upgrades.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My thoughts on whatever everyone else is complaining about:

No, the playerbase isnt "builders, fighters, pirates". The game is called Ikariam - Build, Conquer, Reign. You have to do all of those things to be successful. The main goal of the game is to play the highscore game. You make use of military to achieve goals.

Just because some of you have been for years under the impression that you "won" a battle against a bigger account than yours, just by killing 10k more military than you lost, in the CR overview, doesnt mean you won anything. That small difference between losses doesnt mean anything at all in the grand scheme of the game. This game revolves all around resources and resource production.

No, the battle system isnt as hard as some of you make it out to be. Keep in mind: especially builders have been playing this game for 15+ years. I bet most of them understand whats going on. And if not, they can learn very fast. There is barely any skill expression in ikariam's combat. All of it is a numbers game and a time game. Whoever has more time and more military (resources btw) wins. The mechanics are very simple. This game isnt an esport, stop treating it like it is.

Yes, bigger accounts should have more power over new accounts. The whole point of the game is to make better investments into future than your competition does.

The most annoying thing about combat in Ikariam is whenever you fight a proxy war against someone's alt. Now, with improved upgrades, people with 30M, 40M, 50M, etc accounts dont have to worry as much about someone's bought (or developed on his own) small account.

If your server is full of "bullies", find a better alliance, coordinate better, defend better, go into gold mode for a few months,

or switch to a different community. - Kreon US is pretty friendly, with players from all around the world.

Aquila

Hello all,

I have recently run some tests regarding the new buffed military upgrades. These are the results:

Test results, Forge vs Forge:

attacker

land:

9/8 hops

8/10 swords

6/7 gyros

5/5 balloons

5/7 guns

5/5 mortars

7/6 rams

sea:

5/6 steams

8/8 rams

6/7 flames

5/5 mortars

5/5 rockets

5/5 carriers

5/5 paddles

VS.

defender

land:

3/3 hops

3/3 swords

1/0 gyros

0/0 rest

sea:

0/0 all

SNIPES, sea

1-30-6

1-30-5

SNIPES, land

vs gyro

vs balloon

STANDARD, land

ROUND 1

STANDARD, sea

steams vs steams, rockets

ROUND 1

wave vs steams, rockets

ROUND 2

wave vs wave

ROUND 3

CONCLUSION

Im glad that Gameforge decided to buff the upgrades. We finally received a new goal in terms of military development for our accounts.

Some players enjoy the playstyle of sniping entire fleets within minutes. The defender usually doesnt like having to monitor the game 24/7 to avoid getting sniped. Personally, I think the interaction between 5/5 carriers and paddles vs 0/0 rockets, carriers, and paddles is a little too strong, and Im not sure if this is healthy for the game.

Aquila

Hello badidol ,

now that we talked about my concerns regarding the Town Hall costs, in the german channel of the ikariam discord server, I have had some time to think about the update.

Here’s my Feedback, and a few questions:

1. Building costs and building time. – OK (as long as the Town Hall prices are indeed bugged)

My first thought is that you had to change the formula for cost growth, to achieve code optimization for future updates. Is that correct? If not, then why change the costs?

2. Upgrades. – Not OK. I dont like the way this has been handled.

In order for Upgrades to not be too strong, you had to scale up the stats of the units. For this, you chose the factor x20. However, you didnt scale the previous original three upgrades with the new factor.

Even though the selling point of the „new upgrades“ update is that they’re „infinite“, they are in fact capped by the resource cost. Im going to approximate the cost growth as a linear function with a factor of about x2, per level of Upgrade.

In order to achieve the exact same power, that each and every unit/ship currently has on the live servers, we need to get our Upgrades up to level 60.

Thats a cost of about – „base cost“ x 2⁵⁹ – for the 60th upgrade alone. This is unrealistic to be ever achieved under current production circumstances.

This essentially means, that the „infinite upgrade“ update removes our existing three Upgrades (reduce attack and armor of each unit/ship), and makes us pay infinitely to get back to the same stats.

I believe that updates should add something to the game, instead of removing from it.

I am strongly in favor for a small change to this:

Old unit stats „a“

Old unit upgrades +3 „b“

New units stats: a x20 + b x20

New upgrades same as old upgrades: +1/+1 and +2/+2

By doing this, we will start at the exact same power level at which units/ships have been for over a decade. Additional „infinite“ upgrades can start from here.

Once this is addressed, the wonder Hephaestus Forge will also need to be adjusted:

Level 5 Forge currently gives 20% attack and 2 armor. This should also be scaled up with the new factor too:

New level 5 Forge: 20% attack and 40 armor.

Was this intended, or is it a Town Hall situation again? If it was intended, then why?

If the update goes live like this, all that is going to happen is that there are going to be more unit losses per round. An artificial increase of military losses. If this was in fact the goal, then again I believe that the problem of inflationary military could’ve been handled better:

Add bigger battlefields. Just like there already are different battlefields for specific Town Hall levels.

3. Closing remarks.

Its always good to see that there are new updates coming to the game. I have enjoyed every update you have released in the last few years. I believe you are on the right track.

Please do the military side of the game justice. Lets move forwards, not backwards.

Aquila

Quote from truongtamphong

Quote from -Aquila-

Who is making decisions in your alliance? Who are you representing? I want to know who I'm talking to. List the names of the players. Its disrespectful to come here and make demands, while you're using the alias of a different player on the server.

Also, you're in no position to make any demands, such as having us move our towns from your area. Especially when you started this war, because you're too "lazy" to communicate.

it sound like ridiculous but how about this: everyone have their vote, everyone may talk, may give their option. That's how decision was made.

no interest in doing kind of stuff like: secretary. no fun at all. So tell me: why someone have to do it ?

PS: and be honest you are talking to me: the softest, easiest one in our alliance.I am too easy person to be secretary.

Display More

You asked me, why someone has to do the job of the "secretary".... This war is the exact reason why.

Even though, decisions are taken in a group, someone specific has to represent the alliance in diplomatic discussion with other alliances on the server. If this is done well by both sides, wars like our current one, could've been avoided completely.

That being said, your latest post in this thread disappoints me.

1. I dont know if tuantam has demolished all his temples at 12:98. Maybe Lost leadership should've checked the towns regularly??????

2. Why did it take you close to 2 weeks to let anyone know???????????

You have to understand that most of the players actively fighting you right now, do not care about your temples. They're attacking you, because you attacked them first. If leadership says stop, they stop. In order for leadership to say stop, you have to talk to them and come to an agreement.

Quote from truongtamphong

Quote from -Aquila-

Who are you?

The secretary of our is not fluent in English and lazy too. So thats the reason why your mess was ignored. And others who can write in E without transtrale app were lazy to be secretary.

We vote in group chat and I was sent to talk to you because I can communicate in English.

ok, I shall ask who want to take this job: chat with you guy. Just wait. This one shall sent mess to June

Who is making decisions in your alliance? Who are you representing? I want to know who I'm talking to. List the names of the players. Its disrespectful to come here and make demands, while you're using the alias of a different player on the server.

Also, you're in no position to make any demands, such as having us move our towns from your area. Especially when you started this war, because you're too "lazy" to communicate.

Quote from truongtamphong

I will use this nickname to represent the Viet alliance. I borrow this nickname, note: I am not truongtamphong in the game.

1. The war began because WLS attack one of our member without negotiate. Maybe some of you think Viet is easy target at the time. Account tuantam is a busy man in real life and he not understand how temple work or leaching mean.But if you chose to talk in the alliance channel, it would go alot more easier way.

It is obvious that we will respond to the attack, and some lost member was decided to join. That how war started, not suddenly like June said.

2. This war has been going on for quite a long time and our new year is coming. At this scale of the war, arm or gold of both side are nothing. If one side is distracted for 30 minutes, they will lose and have to run away and the result was cities was pillaged. Some combat reports cannot describe the severity and harshness of the war. Ppl were in the war are burn out. Work and personal life are seriously affected. But i have to say: lost alliance is much richer than us. Many of us have to thank you for your res, of couse some of us have to VM in long time. If the war had continued, perhaps the two alliances would have been equally rich.

3. Although there were still a few voices of opposition, the vast majority passed. We want to stop the war here with 2 conditions:

- you have to relocation town of batman in 4:56 and town of sergio in 2:54.

- No attacking to each others.

Display More

Who are you?

Why do you want to charge me more money?

I've explained your problem Killjoy within the first 3 messages I posted in this thread. You believe, that you are a HAWK, flying above us all. You should consider applying for an alliance.

Thats exatly the united player base you are looking for. Fighters and suppliers, not fighters and builders.

Quote from nosorog

Quote from -Aquila-

Why do you believe the game would be better without general banks? Whats the problem with an emergency stash of military? Why do you not have access to one in your alliance?

This system creates an even bigger difference between casual or newer players and veterans. Veteran players already have more skills and time, and now, even if you manage to defeat them, they could have access to a nearly unlimited reserve of troops (practically speaking).

I also believe that requiring players to build their military from scratch would be a lot more strategically interesting than just buying troops when a war starts. If another alliance wanted to attack you, they would first need to save enough gold and then begin building up their military—a sort of mobilization process or an "arms race," if you will.

With such a system, alliances couldn't simply deploy millions of generals from nowhere. If they did manage to pull this off, it would clearly be the fault of your alliance for not noticing the warning signs. General scores are public, so a smart alliance would start building up its military when they notice a drastic increase in another alliance’s general score. This dynamic could mimic a scenario similar to World War I, where both sides escalate their preparations in response to each other.

Additionally, losing battles would have a much greater impact, as players would need time to rebuild their armies—especially their fleets. During this rebuilding phase, they would be more vulnerable to enemy attacks, adding an extra layer of strategy and risk.

From a purely monetary perspective, this system could also benefit the game developers. Players might be more likely to buy troop packs with ambrosia since they couldn’t simply rely on withdrawing troops from a general bank.

Display More

There is no such thing as defeating an opponent in Ikariam. I told you all plenty of times, to join a big alliance. Veteran players are also friendly people.

Why go through all that trouble? You do see other alliances increasing the General Scores of their military banks. Also, the gold part must be a joke.

Losing battles having a much greater impact is simply just boring. The current strategy in battle is to either snipe an entire fleet within hours, while the opponent is offline, or dump your military into a defensive battle, while using the Hades wonder on it. And to be honest, im loving Hades. I dont have to monitor the game 24/7, just send ammo and refill slots in the battle.

Quote from Morgoth_Bauglir

Quote from -Aquila-

Quote from nosorog

Quote from Morgoth_Bauglir

They got banned because they screwed up logins. Not because they were using devices properly and then someone decided to ban them... And again, as I already said - if they are mindful of what they are doing, and do it properly and carefully - there is no way for GF to ban them. They are following the rules - no matter if it's abuse of rules and technology in the background. They become "cheaters" only when they screw up...

I think that the rules are clear: "Each player is allowed to control up to 11 accounts per server." So if they have more than 11 they are not following the rules - therefore they are cheaters. same way as arson is a crime even if you don't get caught.

I agree with you that they are unlikely to get banned if they don't screw up, but many people on this thread believe it is not so and that moderators are actually working. including -Aquila- among others

Quote from -Aquila-

Cheaters are getting banned now, more than they have ever been in the last few years. The Mods are doing their job. Thank you very much!

sorry for bringing you into this topic again, but you seemed to be quite sure that moderation team is implementing the rules. at least on select servers it seems

The point of my suggestion is not to eliminate the cooperation between builders and fighters. I agree that this is an interesting dynamic in the game, where fighters rely on builder friends to supply troops in exchange for providing protection. However, I strongly believe the game would be better with some restrictions on general banks. This way, alliance members would actually have to produce troops instead of storing millions of them in cryogenic vaults—essentially what general banks are.

As I described above, I think there should be a cap on the number of generals you can take into vacation mode. This cap could be based on the total potential gold income of an account (determined by the number of citizens across all towns). Larger accounts would naturally be able to keep more generals, but the scaling would slow as the account size increases. This is just an idea, but it would at least force general banks to be smaller.

For example, on my server, the largest general bank holds 15.7 million generals while having a builder score of just 1.7 million. If general banks were limited to an average of 100k generals (just a symbolic number that seems reasonable), maintaining a similar bank would require 157 separate accounts.

In my opinion, this would make a huge difference. Even if someone wanted to "cheat" with illegal multi-accounts, running 157 different accounts across 15 separate IP addresses would be a logistical nightmare. It would significantly increase the chances of mistakes and detection, making bans far more likely.

Is this solution perfect? No! But i believe that it would be overall positive change. if anything it would make cooperation between real players even more important.

Display More

Why do you believe the game would be better without general banks? Whats the problem with an emergency stash of military? Why do you not have access to one in your alliance?

First of all, 100k generals isnt reasonable. Thats 5M resources base cost. No cost reductions applied.

I mentioned the importance of account strategy during my earlier posts. My account for example can essentially produce 120-150k generals per day from my own production alone. The only limiting factor is population at the moment. Give the game another 2-3 (10+ !) years and this amount is going to become even larger.

It's nothing special for alliances to plan a coordinated attack, where they would dump 1-5M generals onto the islands of another alliance. What will you do then, if you do not have any military hidden around?

On the topic of alliances, I think you're missing something in your logic. Even though you have access to a large military bank, it doesnt mean that nobody is rebuilding generals. Join an active, big alliance, and have a look for yourself. Most of the time, you get your military from other players, not the bank.

If someone wants to cheat, they will cheat. 1-100 accounts, it doesnt matter. The only real problem with cheaters that the game currently has, from what Ive seen, is the illegal account trading and use of VPN. The only way to combat this ever growing problem, is by making use of alts within the set of rules available to us.

• "It is possible to maintain several accounts on one and the same server. These have to be announced to us by using a game internal function. Direct interaction between these multi accounts is not allowed. Circumventing these rules via other players is not allowed."

This exact rule is part of the skill ceiling of Ikariam. Not waving a few flame ships every round, like you used to do 17 years ago.

There simply is just way more to the game than gathering resources passively and using them to build up your account. Do not try to kill the game for us, just because your team doesnt do combat.

Display More

Now that you mention it - I kind of feel like waving should be a huge deal. On that note, maybe a good solution is to introduce a battlefield scaling in size. When dumping so much generals, even the largest battlefield size becomes a choke point. Why not give even bigger sizes? This will also allow for catching general banks while they are off VM and you can actually destroy huge amounts of the stored units. And instead of limiting the ability to buy/sell units, why not limit 24 hours for being off VM before reactivating it again (and if you really are in actual need of VM - you can assign automatic reactivation once 24 hr window has passed)? Disable VM option if the city is being attacked (with automatic activation as soon as the attack is over). And also remove the option to withdraw from battle for defender, or lock the units in place for an hour if they are withdrawn from defense side. Or change it so that you can offer withdrawal instead of just being able to do it and then the attacker can chose to accept and take resources in the pillage, or simply refuse and continue the battle if he is after the army. Or you lose 25% - 33% of your units each time you withdraw from the battle (as defender)? If you want to rotate units from the defender town - just send them to itself to join in the fight so you can withdraw them and then send them back again as soon as they arrive (instead of rejoining the battle). That gives the defender the ability to rotate units instead of locking them in but requires him to time the troop movement allowing for skill expression and more flexibility. Some players just want to be the attackers - so make it so that instead of scattering - troops will join in the fight if the town gets occupied if someone is avoiding the fight. Make it harder for those who are avoiding conflict - forcing them to be careful and plan ahead.

Display More

Yes, an increase in battlefield size is the exact same solution / improvement to the game I arrived to aswell, 1,5 - 2 years ago, once Gameforge introduced the God's Shrine.

Cooldown on Vacation Mode is a bad idea. Right now, you are allowed to take a break from the game, whenever you want to. This is exactly how it should be. Not everyone is proficient in the art of war. Do not allow casual players to get bullied at their hobby.

Also, 17 years into the game is not a good time to change fundamental mechanics.

But do however combine Offensive and Defensive Points into one category. Too many players want only Offensive Points. The result of this is an everlasting running around, until the so called "good" fighter catches you offline.

Quote from nosorog

Quote from Morgoth_Bauglir

They got banned because they screwed up logins. Not because they were using devices properly and then someone decided to ban them... And again, as I already said - if they are mindful of what they are doing, and do it properly and carefully - there is no way for GF to ban them. They are following the rules - no matter if it's abuse of rules and technology in the background. They become "cheaters" only when they screw up...

I think that the rules are clear: "Each player is allowed to control up to 11 accounts per server." So if they have more than 11 they are not following the rules - therefore they are cheaters. same way as arson is a crime even if you don't get caught.

I agree with you that they are unlikely to get banned if they don't screw up, but many people on this thread believe it is not so and that moderators are actually working. including -Aquila- among others

Quote from -Aquila-

Cheaters are getting banned now, more than they have ever been in the last few years. The Mods are doing their job. Thank you very much!

sorry for bringing you into this topic again, but you seemed to be quite sure that moderation team is implementing the rules. at least on select servers it seems

The point of my suggestion is not to eliminate the cooperation between builders and fighters. I agree that this is an interesting dynamic in the game, where fighters rely on builder friends to supply troops in exchange for providing protection. However, I strongly believe the game would be better with some restrictions on general banks. This way, alliance members would actually have to produce troops instead of storing millions of them in cryogenic vaults—essentially what general banks are.

As I described above, I think there should be a cap on the number of generals you can take into vacation mode. This cap could be based on the total potential gold income of an account (determined by the number of citizens across all towns). Larger accounts would naturally be able to keep more generals, but the scaling would slow as the account size increases. This is just an idea, but it would at least force general banks to be smaller.

For example, on my server, the largest general bank holds 15.7 million generals while having a builder score of just 1.7 million. If general banks were limited to an average of 100k generals (just a symbolic number that seems reasonable), maintaining a similar bank would require 157 separate accounts.

In my opinion, this would make a huge difference. Even if someone wanted to "cheat" with illegal multi-accounts, running 157 different accounts across 15 separate IP addresses would be a logistical nightmare. It would significantly increase the chances of mistakes and detection, making bans far more likely.

Is this solution perfect? No! But i believe that it would be overall positive change. if anything it would make cooperation between real players even more important.

Display More

Why do you believe the game would be better without general banks? Whats the problem with an emergency stash of military? Why do you not have access to one in your alliance?

First of all, 100k generals isnt reasonable. Thats 5M resources base cost. No cost reductions applied.

I mentioned the importance of account strategy during my earlier posts. My account for example can essentially produce 120-150k generals per day from my own production alone. The only limiting factor is population at the moment. Give the game another 2-3 (10+ !) years and this amount is going to become even larger.

It's nothing special for alliances to plan a coordinated attack, where they would dump 1-5M generals onto the islands of another alliance. What will you do then, if you do not have any military hidden around?

On the topic of alliances, I think you're missing something in your logic. Even though you have access to a large military bank, it doesnt mean that nobody is rebuilding generals. Join an active, big alliance, and have a look for yourself. Most of the time, you get your military from other players, not the bank.

If someone wants to cheat, they will cheat. 1-100 accounts, it doesnt matter. The only real problem with cheaters that the game currently has, from what Ive seen, is the illegal account trading and use of VPN. The only way to combat this ever growing problem, is by making use of alts within the set of rules available to us.

• "It is possible to maintain several accounts on one and the same server. These have to be announced to us by using a game internal function. Direct interaction between these multi accounts is not allowed. Circumventing these rules via other players is not allowed."

This exact rule is part of the skill ceiling of Ikariam. Not waving a few flame ships every round, like you used to do 17 years ago.

There simply is just way more to the game than gathering resources passively and using them to build up your account. Do not try to kill the game for us, just because your team doesnt do combat.

Again, you're seeing this "issue" from the point of view of a "builder", who logs in every now and then to do some upgrades. Example Killjoy. That was btw the only point in showing who he is and how he got to create this thread, to rant about military banks and alts.

The active playerbase, that most likely also spends the most ambrosia are "fighters". Your suggestions are just restricting the game more.

What it seems to me, is that you guys do not understand a simple fact about Ikariam:

Its called fighters and suppliers, not fighters and builders. We all build. Thats what it has always been like. The game is all about coordinating and cooperating with other players.

Simply divide the military into more military banks with less upkeep each?????????? All you get then is an annoying cooldown!

Counter suggestion: In order to fix your problem with general banks, you might aswell make it an official function of alliances. Players get to donate and withdraw generals. This would however just dumb the game down more.

Quote from Killjoy

Quote from User12996

Quote from Killjoy

I hope you guys notice that I'm not looking for validation here. I don't want you guys to tell me I'm right. You know very well that it makes sense, and this idea could be really good to stop the cheaters.

Badidol hasn't even spoken to the deciders, but regardless of how long it takes, you know this is going to be very good for all of us.

I know my english is not perfect, it is my second language. As someone who created an account on us server to have more fun, I really believe that all servers from all countries are going to benefit from that.

On the first page of this thread, I wanted to have a single player server. Badidol said that's not possible. Alright, I understand.

You guys don't want to get rid of this black market stuff. Alright, I also understand.

What if we both give up a little bit what we want for a common good?

Display More

Again, I don't know why you think this would stop cheaters. This doesn't stop or address cheaters at all. Cheaters are the ones using illegal multi accounts. They don't care about the current rules. Why would they care about future rules? Again, I don't know how you come up with these conclusions. They're illogical.

Display More

Why does someone decide to break the rules? TO GET THINGS FASTER. He buys time when he uses VPN, because he can do everything other players can't. If he had ambrosia, he wouldn't need to use VPN in the first place.

The players who pay fair, like Eric, for example, have already spent over 500 dollars in the game. They invest in the divine fountain to get "infinite ambrosia" (as long as they log in, right?).

It's not going to be a problem for Eric because he is ethical. Eric likes to play the game, and that's why alts exist. Plus, banning members is a form a punishment. Charging ambrosia is a punishment too.

You're not gonna charge ambrosia all the time, of course. The other day I saw an offer at the trading post: 6 thousands navy for 24kk gold. Look how cheap is this offer. I also noticed you can exchange troops for other resources such as wood and crystal, which you can get on piracy.

If players get ambrosia tariffs for every 5 thousand units sold, for example, they would think twice before doing such investment, all players could buy the same quantity of troops and piracy wouldn't be enough to make them have troops too. They would need to undergo the process of training troops and waiting days to have them.

Everybody can use the black market for free. The first 4999 troops, for example, wouldn't have tariffs. You can buy the way you want.

Then, all resources gotten on piracy would be spent on buildings, which is the main goal of the game, I believe.

Display More

I wasnt going to post anymore in this thread, but you're still pushing your bad suggestions on a thread monitored by badidol .

You DO NOT understand the game well enough, to make educated suggestions!

Do you know about that specific discord server, that sells everything you would wish for in the game? Military, gold, ambrosia, accounts, whatever you want!

Your suggestions are only a disadvantage for legit players! The only way to combat whats really going on behind the scenes, is by playing smart with your friends and making use of alt accounts to their fullest potential within the set of rules available to us.

Cheaters wont care about your ambrosia tax! But legit players will!

Quote from nosorog

Quote from -Aquila-

Im sorry to break this to you, but alts have existed in the game ever since the first merge. That was 2010 maybe? Having alts has been a strategy for longer than not having them has.

Ikariam is a strategy game, controlled by a set of rules. As with the nature of any strategy game, your goal is to play as smart as possible within that set of rules.

I hated the idea of seeing so many alts around too, some years ago. Then I understood what those players were doing. Then I improved my strategy. Now, im having more fun than ever, playing this game. Its essentially big teams of long time players, with access to seamingly unlimited military and gold, fighting each other for 100s of rounds, while you personally dont have to monitor the game 24/7. Also, you get to build more accounts, which is always fun.

Me specifically, I dont even need military and gold banks, because my account is built smart.

Cheaters are getting banned. Again, if you think everyone is cheating, you are bad at the game. If you yourself are cheating, you are also bad at the game, and will get caught!

Have you seen the Hades trick, that some players are doing? Some call it an exploit, others realize that its a valid strategy within the set of rules available to us, ever since miracles have been introduced. I havent tested it myself yet (busy fighting a war, as noted previously), but you can bet I will! Same thing. Uninformed players will call it cheating, others will understand it.

Learn to play the game. Join a Team, learn from them. Adapt to the game. Accept it. Or keep crying. This is Ikariam in the year 2025.

Display More

I somewhat agree with you. My issue isn’t with people cooperating or friends helping each other in alliances—that’s actually one of the most enjoyable aspects of the game. For context, I play in a relatively remote part of the server with a small group of about 15 players clustered on one side of the map. We're not part of the biggest alliance, but we have a great time working together.

As I mentioned before, multi-accounts aren’t the issue if they’re used according to the rules. If the rules are regularly enforced on your server, that’s fantastic. To be honest i envy your server seeming stellar moderation. Unfortunately, that’s not the case on many other servers.

Here’s an example from the server I play on (bg_Phi):

• Throwaway accounts for blocking spots: There’s one player who uses an absurd number of throwaway accounts to block colony slots. On “my” islands alone, there are currently 8 accounts with level 1 colonies doing nothing but preventing others from settling there. When they’re done blocking, the player deletes the colony, moves a raid base there, pillages whoever they like, and vanishes. Then, almost instantly, another account establishes a new colony in the same spot. Over the past year, this player has used at least 20 different accounts just on the few islands I frequent—and they’re doing this across the entire map.
• Multi-account alliances for pillaging: There’s an alliance composed entirely of alt accounts. These accounts exist solely to boost a single main account through pillaging. They have no generals, no walls, no fleets, and they’re all located on the same island as the larger player.
• Piracy bots: On some islands, there are clusters of 10 accounts, each with exactly one colony, a level 1 town hall, and a pirate fortress. Their total scores range from 7,400 to 7,700, and one larger player has a colony there and collects from all of them.
• Vacation mode hoarding: There are 25 accounts with over 1 million generals score each, but they’re all in vacation mode. Of the top 50 generals on the server, only 8 are active; the rest are sitting idle in vacation mode.

All of this blatantly breaks the game rules, yet not a single ban has been issued in over a year.

Quote from AT Barbarossa

I want to add to this post, that in my opinion the most worrying situation is the last, because if a player surround itself by island full of alt accounts on VMode it is somehow impossibile to attack it in a reasonable amount of time, so, while all other points are related only to main account and alts account ( the main account use the alt to gain advantage for itself) the last point include a direct penalization for third accounts.

I don't know if it positive for the game. Maybe payer feel safer in bunker islands group and do not abandon the game, but in that case there should be some events or whatever to compete in a different way, avoiding each account to be damaged ( pillage, occupation ecc) from others.

I meant it more in a way where 1 player does not block spots on "his" island but blocks spots on islands that he is not on, whether to nuke the wonder faith, or just to be a placeholder for his piracy raid base. this way a player is outright ruining the game experience of other people, or as you described it penalizing third accounts

Display More

Im not sure you're getting it quite right.

Your list:

1. This is allowed. You dont know if all of the Polises belong to the same player or more, and it costs ambrosia to buy town teleports.

You and your alliance should've prepared better for the merge. Lock your islands, and fight the attacker together.

2. The Mods have access to the logs. Report the accounts. Idk what proof you have.

The alt alliances you're seeing are a big "Hello! These are our alts. Dont be stupid and attack them."

3. The Mods have access to the logs. Report the accounts. On my server they're banned!

4. This is allowed. Example: someone in your alliance doesnt like to fight, but offers his alt to hold military produced by the rest of you. Everyone plays their part in some way or another. Fighters and suppliers.

You need ammo, to fire a gun. Idk if you noticed but the point of the game is to wait around until you have enough resources for an upgrade. Players get bored. Alliances start wars. Thats what makes the game fun -- coordinating with your team. This also gets the activity and purchase power up.

Military banks should actually be encouraged. Whats wrong with an emergency stash of military, when your enemy warps next to you with 1M generals?

Quote from User12996

Quote from nosorog

Quote from -Aquila-

For context, Killjoy, (you're killing the joy out of talking about improvements the Ikariam team should be working on btw.):

backed up by all his friends and references in the game, :

just said, that we're all the same, and he refuses to join any of us. I guess he's talking about us, our enemies, and all our friendly alliances (plural in case you missed it), that have their own alts and play the game legit.

Wait a second. Thats everyone on the server, no? What are you doing buddy? Are we all cheating? Or... get this.... you, Killjoy, didnt adapt to, or learn all together to play, the game.

The game is about growing your account, so you can hold and produce more resources, more military, and more gold.

The game rules say 11 accounts with IP-Sharing. Your choice.

Cheaters are getting banned now, more than they have ever been in the last few years. The Mods are doing their job. Thank you very much!

Display More

I have no horse in this race (i do not play, nor do i want to start playing on any of US servers) but you -Aquila- are just being childish there. Trying to show he is in a small alliance and posting his info publicly is just sad.

I don't know if you are circumventing the rules via VPNs, nor do i know if mods are doing their job on that server. But i can assure you that they are not doing their job on many other servers and that VPN cheating and piracy botting is clearly going on.

As for your arguments legally used multi accounts cannot replenish your army overnight since you cannot trade with them (just an example i am not referring to Killjoy anecdote, since i do not know the details there). general banks should not exist then, yet they clearly do.

Display More

Eh, he's being blunt about the situation.

While I'm not a fighter so I have to talk around the situation, he's making a good point. Replenishing your troops overnight is or isn't indicative of alts or cheating. It's indicative of working as a team.

Accusing him of cheating because he's pointing out that he can work with his alliance to recover isn't a good look, either.

What it seems, really, is that Killjoy wants to be able to be able to take on an entire alliance by himself and somehow win which isn't really practical, alts or not, and it's silly to complain about alts simply because you LOST (lol I had to) to a larger alliance.

Display More

For the record, LOST isnt involved in his dispute. I didnt even know who Killjoy was, before seeing this thread pop up in my feed every day for the last 2 weeks. Once he mentioned the same server I play on, and some of the alliances and players I know of, I just had to set him straight.

You want a solution for the "average" player? Improve the game by giving big accounts a meaningful progression path. Maybe linked to the total amount of Palace + GR levels. Add a "skill tree", I dont care.

The goal of this is for big main accounts (lets say 50M Total score) to have no issues stomping small alts (lets say 10M Total score).

Im sorry to break this to you, but alts have existed in the game ever since the first merge. That was 2010 maybe? Having alts has been a strategy for longer than not having them has.

Ikariam is a strategy game, controlled by a set of rules. As with the nature of any strategy game, your goal is to play as smart as possible within that set of rules.

I hated the idea of seeing so many alts around too, some years ago. Then I understood what those players were doing. Then I improved my strategy. Now, im having more fun than ever, playing this game. Its essentially big teams of long time players, with access to seamingly unlimited military and gold, fighting each other for 100s of rounds, while you personally dont have to monitor the game 24/7. Also, you get to build more accounts, which is always fun.

Me specifically, I dont even need military and gold banks, because my account is built smart.

Cheaters are getting banned. Again, if you think everyone is cheating, you are bad at the game. If you yourself are cheating, you are also bad at the game, and will get caught!

Have you seen the Hades trick, that some players are doing? Some call it an exploit, others realize that its a valid strategy within the set of rules available to us, ever since miracles have been introduced. I havent tested it myself yet (busy fighting a war, as noted previously), but you can bet I will! Same thing. Uninformed players will call it cheating, others will understand it.

Learn to play the game. Join a Team, learn from them. Adapt to the game. Accept it. Or keep crying. This is Ikariam in the year 2025.

Quote from nosorog

Quote from -Aquila-

For context, Killjoy, (you're killing the joy out of talking about improvements the Ikariam team should be working on btw.):

backed up by all his friends and references in the game, :

just said, that we're all the same, and he refuses to join any of us. I guess he's talking about us, our enemies, and all our friendly alliances (plural in case you missed it), that have their own alts and play the game legit.

Wait a second. Thats everyone on the server, no? What are you doing buddy? Are we all cheating? Or... get this.... you, Killjoy, didnt adapt to, or learn all together to play, the game.

The game is about growing your account, so you can hold and produce more resources, more military, and more gold.

The game rules say 11 accounts with IP-Sharing. Your choice.

Cheaters are getting banned now, more than they have ever been in the last few years. The Mods are doing their job. Thank you very much!

Display More

I have no horse in this race (i do not play, nor do i want to start playing on any of US servers) but you -Aquila- are just being childish there. Trying to show he is in a small alliance and posting his info publicly is just sad.

I don't know if you are circumventing the rules via VPNs, nor do i know if mods are doing their job on that server. But i can assure you that they are not doing their job on many other servers and that VPN cheating and piracy botting is clearly going on.

As for your arguments legally used multi accounts cannot replenish your army overnight since you cannot trade with them (just an example i am not referring to Killjoy anecdote, since i do not know the details there). general banks should not exist then, yet they clearly do.

Display More

Childish? Shouldnt you know who you're dealing with, so you can truly understand their point of view? I made Killjoy's information public? Its public in the game Ikariam bud. Also, Im not the one accusing everyone of cheating.

No, your legally used multi accounts cannot replenish your army overnight. But your friends can! You know those people you played with for years? Thats them. How? Trading. Its in the game.

Or you could also replinish plenty of military queued up for a long time depending on your account size.

For context, Killjoy, (you're killing the joy out of talking about improvements the Ikariam team should be working on btw.):

backed up by all his friends and references in the game, :

just said, that we're all the same, and he refuses to join any of us. I guess he's talking about us, our enemies, and all our friendly alliances (plural in case you missed it), that have their own alts and play the game legit.

Wait a second. Thats everyone on the server, no? What are you doing buddy? Are we all cheating? Or... get this.... you, Killjoy, didnt adapt to, or learn all together to play, the game.

The game is about growing your account, so you can hold and produce more resources, more military, and more gold.

The game rules say 11 accounts with IP-Sharing. Your choice.

Cheaters are getting banned now, more than they have ever been in the last few years. The Mods are doing their job. Thank you very much!

You're just bad at the game, if you think everyone is cheating.