Re: Trade Balance System

by Admin Fri Sep 10, 2010 10:46 am

did you actually make a trade when it displayed those crazy values or did you just go to the broker and type in the numbers to see what values it would display it as.

because there was a problem in the script that did the values incorrectly, however these values were only "active" for about 3.5 hours until now.

by seaborgium Fri Sep 10, 2010 10:57 am

I just put in the numbers.

by Lord Ishurue Fri Sep 10, 2010 6:41 pm

Nomad wrote:
Lord Ishurue wrote:

i see a major hole with this update. Mass & Raids ( Drop the target's defense then raid ) .

since in a Mass & Raid you may have a few people take out the defense and then 1 or 2 guys raid . Compensate every1 then split the profit .

how can Mass & Raids be fairly factored into The Transfer Ratio ?

Mujengan has been doing Mass & Raids since we were Hachigan .

wouldn't those past Mass & Raids effect the transfer limit ?

For example. lets say we took out a guy with 3.25 million UUs. 3 guys involved . the cost add to 250k UUs.
so the 3 of us get 1mil UUs . sending out 2mil UUS for nothing in return in a situation like this should not count .

Just an odd question but why can't everyone involved raid their own UU?

Spreads the ST use across more players .

by seaborgium Fri Sep 10, 2010 9:02 pm

either evolve or fall behind

by Admin Fri Sep 10, 2010 9:28 pm

special attack mission AT costs have also been reduced.
You could have everyone mass a bit, that will also spread the ST/AT use

by Kenzu Sat Sep 11, 2010 11:13 am

Nimras wrote:
Kenzu wrote:
Nimras wrote:
Admin wrote:
Nimras wrote:And I am getting annoyed that the few times i read people asking about cross servers you seems to ignore it or point out that you will not accept that why not? People with low $$ could cross sell from other games to follow the $$ spenders is it because you don't get any money from it?
You want to tell me that those people who donate money to the site should be worse off than those who cross server trade or buy stuff from others with $$?
Ignoring completely the fact that in the latter 2 cases I have no way of knowing if it actually is a trade or simple feeding pretending to be a trade.

esactly you don't thats why you punish the people who is legit.

As you just proved just now your paranoia and fear of Feeders and cheaters you punish everyone else come on Admin instead of punishing everyone else because of your fears and paranoia then find another way to stop the cheaters and feeders.

A red number showing up on your base page isn't punishment. What I call punishment is if someone gets banned or punished with a loss or resources. No one received such punishment yet. So why keep saying that people are punished?

Also, if you have received too many resources and are in red lines, then if you keep receiving more than you pay obviously you will be punished. But if you listen to us, and don't keep on feeding your account, play properly, you will never get punished. You can stay in the red even for years, if you don't receive any resources, you will receive no punishment. Most important is that "well fed accounts" don't get fed more. And it doesn't matter if you have fed it before or after the update, one thing is clear, if in red, don't feed anymore.

To make it clear for everyone: If you started with a red transfer ratio when it has been released, if you don't worsen it, you can keep it red even for years.

Nimras wrote:Admin when do you open up for cross trading again?

As I would like to do that both ways as i do sell resources here for stuff in the other game and the same back i get resources here for stuff i sold in the other game.

You can trade as long as you always stay in green transfer ratio. Don't go above 20% or below -20%.

Nimras wrote:
Admin wrote:Sea I thought you'd cut the crap about kenzu having forced this through by now.

And yes, sorry not to have known that people would think that sending 5% of their account growth away will eventually get them past 20% ratio. It was a serious issue during most of the discussion

Admin Kenzu issue lol yes we all know about you and Kenzu so its ok.

But you still have stopped trading almost 100% with your bull to stop feeders and cheaters.

You have managed to stop everything but the feeders and cheaters.

Anyway i will start trading cross server again and I make it clear here and now I will do it and if my ratio goese because of it then to bad as i will not care about the ratio as i am not cheating or feeding or being feeded go hunt the real feeders and cheaters instead of us who play correctly.

This update should never have happen it should either been here from start not 2 years in because of a Admins paranoiya and Conspiracy Theoriese as he has jesus are there terrorists as well every where around you Admin?

If you make cross server trades for less than 20% of what you produce than you will NEVER go beyond the allowed limit. Of course, if you decide to sell half of what you produce then sooner or later you will be feeding too much and end up with a ban. But this kind of feeding was forbidden already much earlier. Of course now it can be punished much earlier, because no one has doubts whether its still legal or not.

Well see Kenzu there your WRONG. Lets say i wanna trade half my account for GW resources or trade hafl my GW account for AW resources I should be allowed to do that no matter what as its NOT FEEDING but TRADING.

On the other hand if i got resources constantly without paying for it either by giving GW resources or by giving $$ then yes i should be banned for doing so.

But until i do such a thing then I do not see a damn problem only you and ADMIN doese because your paranoia and full of Conspiracy Theories apparently.

So stop the BULL about wanting to stop cheaters and Feeders what you 2 actually want is to controle the game so players can't trade and do their own buisness you wanna be on top of them on how they play and how they work and you just proved it Kenzu so thank you for saying it out loud that you and Admin wanna make sure no one play this game like they want but play it like you want by stopping trading and cross server trading you never wanted to catch the feeders and cheaters DID you? Ohh and btw what stops you and admin from cheating nothing lol maybe thats why so you can cheat :p

It is trading which is ALSO feeding.

Imagine me and you play 2 games, AW and SGW. Imagine there are no restrictions to sending resources. We can make an arragement that I send you everything I produce and you send me everything you produce. Sounds fair right?

And now imagine there are another 2 people, one person has 2 multi accounts on AW, and some other person has 2 multi accounts on SGW. and each of them feed all they produce from one account to the other. Result? They both will get banned, because they feed their accounts.

And now come back to the first example: according to you the trading is fair, because these 2 "traders" do something which has the same result as having multi accounts, namely one account growing 2 times faster because it's being well fed with another account, and the other players who are playing fair and not trying to win by gaining an unfair advantage will be beaten to ground by the cheaters in a war.

If you want, make a cross server trade and sell your account on AW to buy something in some other game, but any attempt to feed one account with vast resources of another account will get you banned.

And it doesn't matter what you call it, all that matters is what impact on the game it has.

Aderan Wars forbids people to gain unfair advantages and trying to be smart and do things which you think are legal, or in some "grey area", even though they result in the same thing as a multi account will get you banned faster than you can say "oops".

Lord Ishurue wrote:

i see a major hole with this update. Mass & Raids ( Drop the target's defense then raid ) .

since in a Mass & Raid you may have a few people take out the defense and then 1 or 2 guys raid . Compensate every1 then split the profit .

how can Mass & Raids be fairly factored into The Transfer Ratio ?

Mujengan has been doing Mass & Raids since we were Hachigan .

wouldn't those past Mass & Raids effect the transfer limit ?

For example. lets say we took out a guy with 3.25 million UUs. 3 guys involved . the cost add to 250k UUs.
so the 3 of us get 1mil UUs . sending out 2mil UUS for nothing in return in a situation like this should not count .

A good way out of it is to have the same people raid who were massing and sabbing.

Let's say there are 200.000 UU to raid.
After target is massed and sabbed, sabber steals 100.000 and masser steals 100.00
They might figure out that the sabber should get 120.000 and masser only 80.00
so the masser sends 20.000 uu
and next time they mass raid, they can predict losses much more accurately.

And the differences will be small. Instead of having one guy transfer 120.000 uu to other guys, he will only transfer 20.000.
sabbers and massers will raid themselves.

Also, how often you make a mass raid? Let's say you do it once a month. If your up is 20.000
then a transfer of 20.000 will not make much difference if you have grown that month by 600.000 due to unit production alone.
Your transfer ratio would stay below 3.5% in this case, even if you did a mass raid each single month.

I am certain you could do things like you are doing them now and your transfer ratio wouldn't go beyond 20% anyway.
But of course don't let some tiny guy do all the raiding himself.
Just make sure that the person with the biggest losses will start raiding first.

Admin wrote:special attack mission AT costs have also been reduced.
You could have everyone mass a bit, that will also spread the ST/AT use

I think Ishurue sees spreading of ST as a bad thing. That's why he doesn't like the idea of having many people raid their uu.

by Capt_Blood Sat Sep 18, 2010 2:32 am

Now that this has been in effect for a while there are some important questions that have not yet been fully answered.

This update has apparently been put in place because of issues around trading by players with Supporter Status and a lot of advice has been given on how players can use trading to remedy issues with their trade balance.

However all of this is applicable only to those players who have Supporter Status and this means that there are no readily available options for players WITHOUT Supporter Status to be able to remedy any imbalance that they may accrue due to the Commander / officer relationship.

Comments were made that players with Supporter Status would be able to broker players without SS but this has not been confirmed.

It irks me that a game that advertises itself as free (and does so on all of the voting sites) implements an update that discriminates against those players who for whatever reason do not want to or cannot pay real money.

If this is indeed a free to play game and Supporter Status is a recognition of those who make donations then what simple and readily available measures are there in place for those without Supporter Status to be able to remedy any imbalance that they will accrue from the Commander / Officer relationship.

by FarleShadow Sat Sep 18, 2010 3:41 am

To add in my 1 dollar's worth:

I dislike the Transfer Ratio. It seems like most of the game is based on sound logic (Players who started long before don't get infinite resources (AE/UP) so they don't become and remain the top players simply because they started before everyone else.

But the TR isn;t subtle or even logical. If I choose, of my own volition, to send a lower player some of my hard-earned resources, I punish myself in the loss of those resources. If an equal rank sends me resources, he punishes himself by removing his rez.

The Idea that the game itself should punish accounts that willingly give resources out to those who are less fortunate is silly, I could have understood a hardcoded limitation to new accounts (To stop ultra-high level people from stuffing unlimited resources into new accounts), but to punish all of us with this psuedo-soviet restriction is insulting and dismissive.

I'm not going to make deals that do not benefit me, nor am I needing a 'big brother' to guide my decisions.

by Admin Sat Sep 18, 2010 9:40 am

FarleShadow wrote:But the TR isn;t subtle or even logical. If I choose, of my own volition, to send a lower player some of my hard-earned resources, I punish myself in the loss of those resources. If an equal rank sends me resources, he punishes himself by removing his rez.

I could hide it as has been suggested before, because i'll be using the system anyway to monitor illegal feeding, then whoever crosses the limits i'll simply ban anyway.
The only difference it will make is that when it's being showed up, people know they might get into trouble soon.

If you wish I can hide that number for you so you dont see it anymore.

FarleShadow wrote:The Idea that the game itself should punish accounts that willingly give resources out to those who are less fortunate is silly, I could have understood a hardcoded limitation to new accounts (To stop ultra-high level people from stuffing unlimited resources into new accounts), but to punish all of us with this psuedo-soviet restriction is insulting and dismissive.

So you're ok with someone making 40 accounts and then feeding the resources, these accounts produce, to themselves?
I'll make a note of that.

Besides, how did you get to the conclusion that what's being targeted is the transfer from big players to small players instead of the other way around? I am really interested in knowing that.

FarleShadow wrote:I'm not going to make deals that do not benefit me, nor am I needing a 'big brother' to guide my decisions.

Sadly that doesn't apply to all players.

by Nomad Sat Sep 18, 2010 1:42 pm

@ Admin,,,, maybe that is an idea that needs consideration. Maybe the ratio should only display after every private trade broker transaction, or every direct send. I hate to use this as an example but it works. Similar to the way weapons damage is displayed in a SGW attack report log.

"Your Empire Financial Adviser indicates your Personal Trade Ratio went from 10.25% to 10.27% with the recent transactions made in your realm"

Something similar could display when certain transactions trigger a PTR change, but not display every time the PTR changes as you can never trade and see the ratio change daily from fluctuation in values.

Capt_Blood wrote:
Spoiler:
If this is indeed a free to play game and Supporter Status is a recognition of those who make donations then what simple and readily available measures are there in place for those without Supporter Status to be able to remedy any imbalance that they will accrue from the Commander / Officer relationship.

Now I would like to see the above addressed as Capt Blood has a point here. Now in my line of thinking my first reaction is to say that first off you can never and will never get any warning or banning from a lop sided Commander/officer ratio. Period. Now if the situation exists long enough it can spill over to your PTR and that can cause you issues. It seems to me it would take a very long period of time to do so, but it is still a possibility. Secondly this would mean your commander is complete inactive or none responsive as all they have to do is adjust your rate, or broker you. Lastly, if you are that concerned then why not simply leave the commander for one more responsive?

Some questions that now arise from this is, if you have a bad trade ratio and change commanders does that ratio follow you to the new commander?

Over all the Simple answer here is to have a responsive commander and none of these issues will ever be a problem, but the point is a legit one that needs a response.

by FarleShadow Sat Sep 18, 2010 4:30 pm

Admin wrote:
FarleShadow wrote:The Idea that the game itself should punish accounts that willingly give resources out to those who are less fortunate is silly, I could have understood a hardcoded limitation to new accounts (To stop ultra-high level people from stuffing unlimited resources into new accounts), but to punish all of us with this psuedo-soviet restriction is insulting and dismissive.
So you're ok with someone making 40 accounts and then feeding the resources, these accounts produce, to themselves?
I'll make a note of that.

Besides, how did you get to the conclusion that what's being targeted is the transfer from big players to small players instead of the other way around? I am really interested in knowing that.

What? Just because I disagree with TR doesn't mean I'm a goddamn account hoarding cheata! Are you some sort of politician?
Multiple accounts ARE cheating, using them to bolster your main account IS cheating, there is no denying that obvious fact, but if you're going to lump legitimate account holders in with those guys because they want to sent some resources about, then you might aswell close up shop all together.

I also got the conclusion that big to small is your target because I like to help out other smaller players with kuwal and units, its not alot of rez, but it makes them bigger and happier. This restriction seems to be a deliberate mark against that behavior.

admin wrote:
FarleShadow wrote:But the TR isn;t subtle or even logical. If I choose, of my own volition, to send a lower player some of my hard-earned resources, I punish myself in the loss of those resources. If an equal rank sends me resources, he punishes himself by removing his rez.
I could hide it as has been suggested before, because i'll be using the system anyway to monitor illegal feeding, then whoever crosses the limits i'll simply ban anyway.
The only difference it will make is that when it's being showed up, people know they might get into trouble soon.

If you wish I can hide that number for you so you dont see it anymore.

I also love the idea about hiding it, because us mindless peons who play the game don't need to be burdened with such trivialities as.... a number that, if it reaches a critical mark, will get us banned. If this is only about monitoring multi-accounts with small feeding big, I could understand, it just seems like you're penalising everyone because the minority are cheating buggers.

by Admin Sat Sep 18, 2010 7:20 pm

FarleShadow wrote:What? Just because I disagree with TR doesn't mean I'm a goddamn account hoarding cheata! Are you some sort of politician?

nc, just because you dont understand it doesn't mean you have to get all aggressive like some others. I was pointing out the flaw in your thinking.

FarleShadow wrote:Multiple accounts ARE cheating, using them to bolster your main account IS cheating, there is no denying that obvious fact, but if you're going to lump legitimate account holders in with those guys because they want to sent some resources about, then you might aswell close up shop all together.

Explain the difference in those two groups, then translate that into how the PTR works and then you will realize that the system is very effective in making that distinction by itself. Perfect, definitely not, but very effective nonetheless.
In case you have trouble doing it I am happy to copy paste the relevant passages posted over and over in this thread again just for you.

FarleShadow wrote:I also got the conclusion that big to small is your target because I like to help out other smaller players with kuwal and units, its not alot of rez, but it makes them bigger and happier. This restriction seems to be a deliberate mark against that behavior.

I have already asked you about how you have come to that conclusion. All you wrote was a repeat of the post I quoted. I'm still waiting for an explanation,

FarleShadow wrote:I also love the idea about hiding it, because us mindless peons who play the game don't need to be burdened with such trivialities as.... a number that, if it reaches a critical mark, will get us banned. If this is only about monitoring multi-accounts with small feeding big, I could understand, it just seems like you're penalising everyone because the minority are cheating buggers.

How am I penalizing anyone? Did anyone get punished yet?
You are writing as if feeding were a black-and-white distinction.
The implementation and display of the PTR is a clear sign that I do not treat it as such.

by Nimras Sat Sep 18, 2010 10:29 pm

Admin wrote:How am I penalizing anyone? Did anyone get punished yet?

Yes your biased yes you treate players you don't like worse than those you like.

Yes you can't be trusted.

Yes your emotional and therefore YES you will PENALIZISE faster those who you do not like against those you do.

the fact is in less than 3 month time i will start trading big time by selling GW resources i made you aware and if you ban me for it your proving my point jesus.

This update is the proof of a paranoya and someone who can't be trusted.

Ohh well at least i can trust my alliance and the players in the game better its also only them that keeps me here and keeps me from doing what it takes to close your game.

Anyway after my rant i might get a damn response on alot of my questions you ignored because you damn well know you can't answer them because i am right huh?

And while you answer them would you please tell me why Alliance Trade doese count against your Transfer Ratio i was told and read else where it WOULD NOT?

by Capt_Blood Sun Sep 19, 2010 2:08 am

@Nimras - I am totally at a loss to see what you are continually complaining about. As far as I can see Admin has spent a lot of time explaining this to you.

Everyone has the same rules applied to them so what is unfair in that.

You may believe that it is acceptable to do cross server trading but the rules here specify that you are to increase you account through your own efforts and not unfairly through someone else's

Being able to do cross server trading in my view is an unfair practice on both games as both parties are using resources gained elsewhere to to bolster their accounts at a rate that is much greater than others are capable of.

Additionally I want to play with others that are interested in investing their time here in this game and not with those who are simply using this game as a means to improve their accounts in some other totally unrelated game. And to be brutally honest these players would probably be much better of if they were to invest their time in the game that they actually want to play.

@Nomad - Yes you have given some possible options in your response but you have not taken into account that changes in the payment will affect all officers and as such a commander may be unwilling to make a change for just one especially where those with SS have the ability to correct issues themselves while those without cannot do this easily.

@ Admin - a response would be appreciated because nowhere is it clearly stated what the impact will be for those without SS and what is in place so that they are not at a disadvantage when compared to those that have SS.

I think that this is a matter that does require clarification as all of the voting sites I have visited that contain a synopsis of the game advertise it as free to play and that SS is not required. While this is true it is misleading.

Looking at my own situation I currently see that my Commander percentage is slowly growing and will continue to do so. Now I could go and look for another commander but looking at the current offers it would appear that I would infact be placing myself at a disadvantage. what I see is that those without SS do not have the freedom of choice in selecting a commander that those with SS have. And what I find even more irking is that it appears that these measures have been implemented because of issues with players that do have SS.

by Nimras Sun Sep 19, 2010 1:55 pm

Capt_Blood wrote:@Nimras - I am totally at a loss to see what you are continually complaining about. As far as I can see Admin has spent a lot of time explaining this to you.

Everyone has the same rules applied to them so what is unfair in that.

You may believe that it is acceptable to do cross server trading but the rules here specify that you are to increase you account through your own efforts and not unfairly through someone else's

Being able to do cross server trading in my view is an unfair practice on both games as both parties are using resources gained elsewhere to to bolster their accounts at a rate that is much greater than others are capable of.

Additionally I want to play with others that are interested in investing their time here in this game and not with those who are simply using this game as a means to improve their accounts in some other totally unrelated game. And to be brutally honest these players would probably be much better of if they were to invest their time in the game that they actually want to play.

Lol Blood.

1. I am transfering resources into my ACCOUNT via another game by selling resources there for resources here. Thats LEGIT admin said it him self.

2. He don't want feeders i aren't being feed i am trading.

3. I do not have $$ to buy stuff for hence why i use the other game as well as i sometimes trade from here to there.

4. What i want to know has nothing to do with this i inform admin to let him know.

5. If you actually cared to read most of my conversations with Admin you would find out alot among others HE has not set a fictive number on how long you can be over or under the trade limit before he warns you or bans you or what ever.

6. Without the limit he him self dictates 100% when he will send a warning or punishe someone aka you he might give f.ecs. 2 weeks before he notisfie you and give you 2 more weeks before he bans you. Me because i dare to speak against him might only get 1 day before warning and 1 day before he bans me. Thats what i am against he doese not set a fixed so its equal for all but instead he tells us he dictates it 100% how can we trust he threats all equal especially when we seen him act on emotions and without reason before?

7. My questions are regarding to why no fixed numbers, why he is punishing everyone else but the cheaters and feeders as far i can see. why alliance transferes still counts towards trade ratio when he says it should not and he will remove it him self when we hit the trade limit how can you count on him to do that for you can you trust him no we cant.

8. As i pointed out he has no problem with cross server trading heck he even wants you to trade between AW main and AW reset as well as he wanna give a bonus to those who play reset on main which is bullocks and another proof of him being biased. Cross server selling is not illigal, but feeding is. If i sell resources in one game and get resources here or if i used $$ to buy resources of a player both will count towards my trade limit which i find f.... up because i should be allowed to play and trade as i want as loong i aren't being feed without having to pay anything. As long i trade for my resources and pay what it cost then it is allowed and should not be a issue but admins fear of feeders make him hunt the wrong people.

Capt_Blood weather you like it or NOT cross server trading is ok and will always be ok because of the fact that instead of buying the resources from a player in $$ i do it in resources from another game. If you deny Cross server trading then $$ sales between players should be denied to and thats not gonna happen.

Now go back to your corner and come back when you actually know what i am complaining about and also can see that what i point out is true.

by Admin Sun Sep 19, 2010 2:42 pm

Capt_Blood wrote:@ Admin - a response would be appreciated because nowhere is it clearly stated what the impact will be for those without SS and what is in place so that they are not at a disadvantage when compared to those that have SS.

Explain disadvantage. Do you mean disadvantage in terms of getting actually punished if they receive too much and cannot send anything in return, or you mean disadvantage in terms of 2 people playing but one person grows faster because they can trade with others.

Capt_Blood wrote:I think that this is a matter that does require clarification as all of the voting sites I have visited that contain a synopsis of the game advertise it as free to play and that SS is not required. While this is true it is misleading.

I do not agree with that. Except player to player trading, there is no advantage an SS player has over a non SS player. There's plenty of games (even the ones similar to AW) where even just buying SS gives you actual extra benefits.
Keep in mind 2 things:
People without SS sell units and receive kuwal units or attack turns from others by becoming their officers with this update
You dont need to spend money to get SS, there's a reason trade brokers support donations as a form of payment

Yes people who donate are better off, but that's kinda the point of donating money, they keep the game running and there are significant limits as to how much someone can donate.

Capt_Blood wrote:Looking at my own situation I currently see that my Commander percentage is slowly growing and will continue to do so. Now I could go and look for another commander but looking at the current offers it would appear that I would infact be placing myself at a disadvantage. what I see is that those without SS do not have the freedom of choice in selecting a commander that those with SS have. And what I find even more irking is that it appears that these measures have been implemented because of issues with players that do have SS.

Having or not having SS does not make any difference how much someone can pay you.
You'd be placing yourself at a disadvantage for joining someone who's offering a rate that's within the green boundary.

by Nimras Sun Sep 19, 2010 6:58 pm

Admin stop ignoring my honest questions just because you don't like me stop proving my point of biased admin Wink

.

by Capt_Blood Mon Sep 20, 2010 11:18 am

Nimras wrote:Lol Blood.

1. I am transfering resources into my ACCOUNT via another game by selling resources there for resources here. Thats LEGIT admin said it him self.

Strange you should say this because I cannot see anywhere that Admin has made this statement. All that I have seen him say is that trading is permitted so long as you stay within the limits.

2. He don't want feeders i aren't being feed i am trading.

In your opinion you are trading however I have seen others who are of the opinion that cross game trading is feeding. The only opinion that matters here is not yours or mine but Admins.

3. I do not have $$ to buy stuff for hence why i use the other game as well as i sometimes trade from here to there.

What has $$ to do with it. I don't have them either but I don't need to use another game to bolster my position here.

4. What i want to know has nothing to do with this i inform admin to let him know.

5. If you actually cared to read most of my conversations with Admin you would find out alot among others HE has not set a fictive number on how long you can be over or under the trade limit before he warns you or bans you or what ever.

I have yet to see you post anything on this matter that in any way could be termed a conversation. Why does Admin have to set a fixed number, it's really quite simple, if your in the red there's already an issue but rather that banning you he's giving you the chance to take actions to rectify it and he's giving you plenty of time as he's stated all you have to do is to make the effort. You do not have to solve it immediately

6. Without the limit he him self dictates 100% when he will send a warning or punishe someone aka you he might give f.ecs. 2 weeks before he notisfie you and give you 2 more weeks before he bans you. Me because i dare to speak against him might only get 1 day before warning and 1 day before he bans me. Thats what i am against he doese not set a fixed so its equal for all but instead he tells us he dictates it 100% how can we trust he threats all equal especially when we seen him act on emotions and without reason before?

Admin does not need any limits, he can ban anyone he wants to at any time. In fact limits would be counter productive because those that this is aimed at would only take advantage of them.

7. My questions are regarding to why no fixed numbers, why he is punishing everyone else but the cheaters and feeders as far i can see. why alliance transferes still counts towards trade ratio when he says it should not and he will remove it him self when we hit the trade limit how can you count on him to do that for you can you trust him no we cant.

8. As i pointed out he has no problem with cross server trading heck he even wants you to trade between AW main and AW reset as well as he wanna give a bonus to those who play reset on main which is bullocks and another proof of him being biased. Cross server selling is not illigal, but feeding is. If i sell resources in one game and get resources here or if i used $$ to buy resources of a player both will count towards my trade limit which i find f.... up because i should be allowed to play and trade as i want as loong i aren't being feed without having to pay anything. As long i trade for my resources and pay what it cost then it is allowed and should not be a issue but admins fear of feeders make him hunt the wrong people.

Explain how you can Trade between Main and Reset Servers. As for the bonus for playing reset I'll ignore it totally as no one as yet knows what it will be

Capt_Blood weather you like it or NOT cross server trading is ok and will always be ok because of the fact that instead of buying the resources from a player in $$ i do it in resources from another game. If you deny Cross server trading then $$ sales between players should be denied to and thats not gonna happen.

Now go back to your corner and come back when you actually know what i am complaining about and also can see that what i point out is true.

It is obvious that you have your own opinion and that you consider it to be more important than anyone else's and that the opinions of others are not important. Instead of complaining how about suggesting something constructive for a change.

Since you have mentioned them above here's some things you should think on.

Alliance Programs - These should be beneficial to all alliance members. If all members are funding it and using it then it should balance out over time for every member.

Cross Server Trading - To me this means that some one is playing one game to amass resources that can be traded with someone else that it doing the same in another game that they are playing e.g. Player 1 amassing resourced in game 1 to trade with player 2 for resources in game 2. Player 2 is amassing resources in game 2 to trade for resources in game 1. Both players will be extremely protective of the resources they are amassing for trade purposes in a game which they don't really care about and you think it fair that those who care should have to put up with this.

$$ Sales - will never be stopped but also as Admin advises this is totally at your own risk

Thank you Admin for your response

Admin wrote:
Capt_Blood wrote:@ Admin - a response would be appreciated because nowhere is it clearly stated what the impact will be for those without SS and what is in place so that they are not at a disadvantage when compared to those that have SS.
Explain disadvantage. Do you mean disadvantage in terms of getting actually punished if they receive too much and cannot send anything in return, or you mean disadvantage in terms of 2 people playing but one person grows faster because they can trade with others.

I was referring to disadvantaged in terms of getting actually punished if they receive too much and cannot send anything in return

Capt_Blood wrote:I think that this is a matter that does require clarification as all of the voting sites I have visited that contain a synopsis of the game advertise it as free to play and that SS is not required. While this is true it is misleading.
I do not agree with that. Except player to player trading, there is no advantage an SS player has over a non SS player. There's plenty of games (even the ones similar to AW) where even just buying SS gives you actual extra benefits.
Keep in mind 2 things:
People without SS sell units and receive kuwal units or attack turns from others by becoming their officers with this update
You dont need to spend money to get SS, there's a reason trade brokers support donations as a form of payment

Yes people who donate are better off, but that's kinda the point of donating money, they keep the game running and there are significant limits as to how much someone can donate.

I fully understand this and have no issues with it at all

Capt_Blood wrote:Looking at my own situation I currently see that my Commander percentage is slowly growing and will continue to do so. Now I could go and look for another commander but looking at the current offers it would appear that I would infact be placing myself at a disadvantage. what I see is that those without SS do not have the freedom of choice in selecting a commander that those with SS have. And what I find even more irking is that it appears that these measures have been implemented because of issues with players that do have SS.
Having or not having SS does not make any difference how much someone can pay you.
You'd be placing yourself at a disadvantage for joining someone who's offering a rate that's within the green boundary.

Reading this it appears that you are saying that I should be looking for the rate that best suits me and do not have to worry about whether it is going to put me in the green or red

I will add that I look at the Commander / Officer relationship in times of peace as nothing more than an economic transaction. As such as an officer I want to get the best rate for my UU that's going and as a commander I want to pay as little as possible for UU. There is also a modifier around safe income levels as well.

Here are some other thoughts as well.
1. If I am receiving a high rate from my commander then so long as I invest the excess in growing my account then I will be fine.
2. If something in time is required for those without SS to balance Commander / officer payments could the Trade Center be used as it is available to everyone.

by Admin Mon Sep 20, 2010 11:43 am

Capt_Blood wrote:Here are some other thoughts as well.
1. If I am receiving a high rate from my commander then so long as I invest the excess in growing my account then I will be fine.
2. If something in time is required for those without SS to balance Commander / officer payments could the Trade Center be used as it is available to everyone.

1) the amount of resources traded compared to the size of your account is so minimal that an officer without SS could be having a commander who wouldn't pay him anything at all, the officer would never reach a red Personal Transfer Ratio. (however the same cannot be unconditionally said about the commander)
Open spoiler if you're interested in the mathematical proof.

Spoiler:

2) I am not sure how that could work, any chance you could elaborate? But you can "fix" the ratio by simply changing how much the commander pays. If the ratio is too high the commander only has to pay a tiny rate for some time for it to get fixed. No need to do actual transfers.

Anyways about the disadvantage:
Updates page 10th september.
I added that if you've received or sent less than 5k attack turns worth of stuff in total then your ratio will always be green, no matter what % gets shown.
5k Attack turns is enough for a new player to receive a quickstart boost (80-90 bil kuwal or 450-550k units with current values i think)
Anything past that and they need to watch the ratio as much as anyone else.

So in a sense, yes, non-SS players might have more difficulty fixing the ratio, however if they ask others to send them resources then that's their choice.
Obviously there's a difference if someone has been in such a situation from the moment the update has been released instead of getting into there after the release.

by Nimras Mon Sep 20, 2010 12:38 pm

Capt_Blood wrote:
Nimras wrote:Lol Blood.

1. I am transfering resources into my ACCOUNT via another game by selling resources there for resources here. Thats LEGIT admin said it him self.

Strange you should say this because I cannot see anywhere that Admin has made this statement. All that I have seen him say is that trading is permitted so long as you stay within the limits.

2. He don't want feeders i aren't being feed i am trading.

In your opinion you are trading however I have seen others who are of the opinion that cross game trading is feeding. The only opinion that matters here is not yours or mine but Admins.

3. I do not have $$ to buy stuff for hence why i use the other game as well as i sometimes trade from here to there.

What has $$ to do with it. I don't have them either but I don't need to use another game to bolster my position here.

4. What i want to know has nothing to do with this i inform admin to let him know.

5. If you actually cared to read most of my conversations with Admin you would find out alot among others HE has not set a fictive number on how long you can be over or under the trade limit before he warns you or bans you or what ever.

I have yet to see you post anything on this matter that in any way could be termed a conversation. Why does Admin have to set a fixed number, it's really quite simple, if your in the red there's already an issue but rather that banning you he's giving you the chance to take actions to rectify it and he's giving you plenty of time as he's stated all you have to do is to make the effort. You do not have to solve it immediately

6. Without the limit he him self dictates 100% when he will send a warning or punishe someone aka you he might give f.ecs. 2 weeks before he notisfie you and give you 2 more weeks before he bans you. Me because i dare to speak against him might only get 1 day before warning and 1 day before he bans me. Thats what i am against he doese not set a fixed so its equal for all but instead he tells us he dictates it 100% how can we trust he threats all equal especially when we seen him act on emotions and without reason before?

Admin does not need any limits, he can ban anyone he wants to at any time. In fact limits would be counter productive because those that this is aimed at would only take advantage of them.

7. My questions are regarding to why no fixed numbers, why he is punishing everyone else but the cheaters and feeders as far i can see. why alliance transferes still counts towards trade ratio when he says it should not and he will remove it him self when we hit the trade limit how can you count on him to do that for you can you trust him no we cant.

8. As i pointed out he has no problem with cross server trading heck he even wants you to trade between AW main and AW reset as well as he wanna give a bonus to those who play reset on main which is bullocks and another proof of him being biased. Cross server selling is not illigal, but feeding is. If i sell resources in one game and get resources here or if i used $$ to buy resources of a player both will count towards my trade limit which i find f.... up because i should be allowed to play and trade as i want as loong i aren't being feed without having to pay anything. As long i trade for my resources and pay what it cost then it is allowed and should not be a issue but admins fear of feeders make him hunt the wrong people.

Explain how you can Trade between Main and Reset Servers. As for the bonus for playing reset I'll ignore it totally as no one as yet knows what it will be

Capt_Blood weather you like it or NOT cross server trading is ok and will always be ok because of the fact that instead of buying the resources from a player in $$ i do it in resources from another game. If you deny Cross server trading then $$ sales between players should be denied to and thats not gonna happen.

Now go back to your corner and come back when you actually know what i am complaining about and also can see that what i point out is true.

It is obvious that you have your own opinion and that you consider it to be more important than anyone else's and that the opinions of others are not important. Instead of complaining how about suggesting something constructive for a change.

Since you have mentioned them above here's some things you should think on.

Alliance Programs - These should be beneficial to all alliance members. If all members are funding it and using it then it should balance out over time for every member.

Cross Server Trading - To me this means that some one is playing one game to amass resources that can be traded with someone else that it doing the same in another game that they are playing e.g. Player 1 amassing resourced in game 1 to trade with player 2 for resources in game 2. Player 2 is amassing resources in game 2 to trade for resources in game 1. Both players will be extremely protective of the resources they are amassing for trade purposes in a game which they don't really care about and you think it fair that those who care should have to put up with this.

$$ Sales - will never be stopped but also as Admin advises this is totally at your own risk

Well i think i take the easy aproach to answer you instead of going in and answer in red.

1. Yes he did say that cross server trading was allowed he just keep talking about his annoying and wrongly made trade system that will not catch the people he is after should be uphold.

2. He is Paranoid.

3. You avoid 1 hell of a question like admin because you know i am right tsk tsk.

4. About your answer to him dictating and ban at will yes and no read question 7 again and you will see my point.

5. You still clearly do not get the point and btw cross server trading is not cheating thats fair and honest trading AT own risk just like $$ you don't get the different between cross server trading, $$ trading and feeding you just proved that.

Now stop trying to continue this when you clearly is out of your league.

by Capt_Blood Tue Sep 21, 2010 5:47 am

@Nimras - Nimmy M8, it appears about the only thing we will be able to agree on is that we disagree. Laughing

@Admin - you are correct that I could ask my commander to change his rate to help the situation but if he has other officers then it's not that cut and dried as they would be affected as well, unless of course you want to investigate the possibility of implementing per officer rates.

My thoughts on utilizing the Trade Centre were along these lines. If the non SS officer is receiving a high value for his UU then he could purchase additional UU in the Trade Center thus using the excess income to fund account growth. I don't think that this needs to be displayed anywhere but if a track of trade center activity is kept in the database you would then be able to see that the player is using the extra income for growth. All that would then be required would be an update to the Wiki advising that Trade Centre activity would be considered for players without SS and can be used as a means of balancing discrepancies.

There is obviously a cost as Market Turns as well as Kuwal are required but as we all get them then it's not really that great a cost.

by Kenzu Tue Sep 21, 2010 7:00 am

Nimras wrote:
Capt_Blood wrote:
Nimras wrote:Lol Blood.

1. I am transfering resources into my ACCOUNT via another game by selling resources there for resources here. Thats LEGIT admin said it him self.

Strange you should say this because I cannot see anywhere that Admin has made this statement. All that I have seen him say is that trading is permitted so long as you stay within the limits.

2. He don't want feeders i aren't being feed i am trading.

In your opinion you are trading however I have seen others who are of the opinion that cross game trading is feeding. The only opinion that matters here is not yours or mine but Admins.

3. I do not have $$ to buy stuff for hence why i use the other game as well as i sometimes trade from here to there.

What has $$ to do with it. I don't have them either but I don't need to use another game to bolster my position here.

4. What i want to know has nothing to do with this i inform admin to let him know.

5. If you actually cared to read most of my conversations with Admin you would find out alot among others HE has not set a fictive number on how long you can be over or under the trade limit before he warns you or bans you or what ever.

I have yet to see you post anything on this matter that in any way could be termed a conversation. Why does Admin have to set a fixed number, it's really quite simple, if your in the red there's already an issue but rather that banning you he's giving you the chance to take actions to rectify it and he's giving you plenty of time as he's stated all you have to do is to make the effort. You do not have to solve it immediately

6. Without the limit he him self dictates 100% when he will send a warning or punishe someone aka you he might give f.ecs. 2 weeks before he notisfie you and give you 2 more weeks before he bans you. Me because i dare to speak against him might only get 1 day before warning and 1 day before he bans me. Thats what i am against he doese not set a fixed so its equal for all but instead he tells us he dictates it 100% how can we trust he threats all equal especially when we seen him act on emotions and without reason before?

Admin does not need any limits, he can ban anyone he wants to at any time. In fact limits would be counter productive because those that this is aimed at would only take advantage of them.

7. My questions are regarding to why no fixed numbers, why he is punishing everyone else but the cheaters and feeders as far i can see. why alliance transferes still counts towards trade ratio when he says it should not and he will remove it him self when we hit the trade limit how can you count on him to do that for you can you trust him no we cant.

8. As i pointed out he has no problem with cross server trading heck he even wants you to trade between AW main and AW reset as well as he wanna give a bonus to those who play reset on main which is bullocks and another proof of him being biased. Cross server selling is not illigal, but feeding is. If i sell resources in one game and get resources here or if i used $$ to buy resources of a player both will count towards my trade limit which i find f.... up because i should be allowed to play and trade as i want as loong i aren't being feed without having to pay anything. As long i trade for my resources and pay what it cost then it is allowed and should not be a issue but admins fear of feeders make him hunt the wrong people.

Explain how you can Trade between Main and Reset Servers. As for the bonus for playing reset I'll ignore it totally as no one as yet knows what it will be

Capt_Blood weather you like it or NOT cross server trading is ok and will always be ok because of the fact that instead of buying the resources from a player in $$ i do it in resources from another game. If you deny Cross server trading then $$ sales between players should be denied to and thats not gonna happen.

Now go back to your corner and come back when you actually know what i am complaining about and also can see that what i point out is true.

It is obvious that you have your own opinion and that you consider it to be more important than anyone else's and that the opinions of others are not important. Instead of complaining how about suggesting something constructive for a change.

Since you have mentioned them above here's some things you should think on.

Alliance Programs - These should be beneficial to all alliance members. If all members are funding it and using it then it should balance out over time for every member.

Cross Server Trading - To me this means that some one is playing one game to amass resources that can be traded with someone else that it doing the same in another game that they are playing e.g. Player 1 amassing resourced in game 1 to trade with player 2 for resources in game 2. Player 2 is amassing resources in game 2 to trade for resources in game 1. Both players will be extremely protective of the resources they are amassing for trade purposes in a game which they don't really care about and you think it fair that those who care should have to put up with this.

$$ Sales - will never be stopped but also as Admin advises this is totally at your own risk

Well i think i take the easy aproach to answer you instead of going in and answer in red.

1. Yes he did say that cross server trading was allowed he just keep talking about his annoying and wrongly made trade system that will not catch the people he is after should be uphold.

2. He is Paranoid.

3. You avoid 1 hell of a question like admin because you know i am right tsk tsk.

4. About your answer to him dictating and ban at will yes and no read question 7 again and you will see my point.

5. You still clearly do not get the point and btw cross server trading is not cheating thats fair and honest trading AT own risk just like $$ you don't get the different between cross server trading, $$ trading and feeding you just proved that.

Now stop trying to continue this when you clearly is out of your league.

1
Which people will the system not catch? What bad things do they do?

2
If you don't aim at getting a permaban, then I suggest you stop writing anything offensive

3
The only question not answered to is 7, but then again it's understandable why not answering it.

"7. My questions are regarding to why no fixed numbers, why he is punishing everyone else but the cheaters and feeders as far i can see. why alliance transferes still counts towards trade ratio when he says it should not and he will remove it him self when we hit the trade limit how can you count on him to do that for you can you trust him no we cant."
-There ARE fixed numbers too. A transfers up to a couple tousand AT are allowed no matter how small/big you are.
-I dont see how he is punishing anyone except people who try to gain unfair advantages.
-You also dont explain how cheaters and feeders DONT get punished. You say they don't get caught?
-Alliance transfers count towards the transfer ratio, because if they didnt, then anyone could have 5 multi accounts in 1 alliances and be feeding the main account with all 5 of them, and it would be harder for admin to decide whether to ban someone or not. With an absolute number this decision has been made easy.
-If alliance transfers don't count, then the whole system will be useless as all cheaters and feeders will feed each other within alliances made for that purpose.
-How can you not see that?

by Nimras Tue Sep 21, 2010 12:36 pm

Kenzu wrote:1
Which people will the system not catch? What bad things do they do?

Lol proved you don't read what i write thanks

2
If you don't aim at getting a permaban, then I suggest you stop writing anything offensive

Offensive lang where where? ohh waite there is non and calling you and admin Paranoid is not offensive lang thats the truth so please stop this bull.

3
The only question not answered to is 7, but then again it's understandable why not answering it.

"7. My questions are regarding to why no fixed numbers, why he is punishing everyone else but the cheaters and feeders as far i can see. why alliance transferes still counts towards trade ratio when he says it should not and he will remove it him self when we hit the trade limit how can you count on him to do that for you can you trust him no we cant."
-There ARE fixed numbers too. A transfers up to a couple tousand AT are allowed no matter how small/big you are.
-I dont see how he is punishing anyone except people who try to gain unfair advantages.
-You also dont explain how cheaters and feeders DONT get punished. You say they don't get caught?
-Alliance transfers count towards the transfer ratio, because if they didnt, then anyone could have 5 multi accounts in 1 alliances and be feeding the main account with all 5 of them, and it would be harder for admin to decide whether to ban someone or not. With an absolute number this decision has been made easy.
-If alliance transfers don't count, then the whole system will be useless as all cheaters and feeders will feed each other within alliances made for that purpose.
-How can you not see that?

lol kenzu your so funny or well not really as you don't get the point.

1. Cross server is not cheating nor getting a unfair advantage if it is then $$ is as well and then both should be stopped.

2. Admin said Alliance transfers did not count towards your transfer ratio according to what i understood and read.

3. Yes i get your paranoya and point about catching the feeders and cheaters but this system will catch neither and you know it. your trying to controle the game and play style.

4. I know for a fact the cheaters and feeders works in best regards because as pointed out by many in here and by my self this system is flawed big time.

by Kenzu Tue Sep 21, 2010 6:56 pm

Capt_Blood wrote:Now that this has been in effect for a while there are some important questions that have not yet been fully answered.

This update has apparently been put in place because of issues around trading by players with Supporter Status and a lot of advice has been given on how players can use trading to remedy issues with their trade balance.

However all of this is applicable only to those players who have Supporter Status and this means that there are no readily available options for players WITHOUT Supporter Status to be able to remedy any imbalance that they may accrue due to the Commander / officer relationship.

Comments were made that players with Supporter Status would be able to broker players without SS but this has not been confirmed.

It irks me that a game that advertises itself as free (and does so on all of the voting sites) implements an update that discriminates against those players who for whatever reason do not want to or cannot pay real money.

If this is indeed a free to play game and Supporter Status is a recognition of those who make donations then what simple and readily available measures are there in place for those without Supporter Status to be able to remedy any imbalance that they will accrue from the Commander / Officer relationship.

Small imbalances dont influence your transfer ratio.
If you get paid so much that it influences your transfer ratio, then it is most likely not going to influence it much anyway.
If it somehow happens that someone will reach 20% transfer ratio through commander/officer relationship without transferring resources, he can always seek advice from admins.

This game is free and as you can see, there are many people without SS, who reached top ranks, so even though SS gives certain benefits, it doesn't mean you can't play the game properly without SS.

Compare Aderan Wars to most games out there and you will see yourself that the other systems are so bad they can't even be compared to the system in Aderan Wars.

PS: You don't need to worry about your trade balance as long as its within 20% up or down. There is a simple advice how to improve it: Grow!

FarleShadow wrote:To add in my 1 dollar's worth:

I dislike the Transfer Ratio. It seems like most of the game is based on sound logic (Players who started long before don't get infinite resources (AE/UP) so they don't become and remain the top players simply because they started before everyone else.

But the TR isn;t subtle or even logical. If I choose, of my own volition, to send a lower player some of my hard-earned resources, I punish myself in the loss of those resources. If an equal rank sends me resources, he punishes himself by removing his rez.

The Idea that the game itself should punish accounts that willingly give resources out to those who are less fortunate is silly, I could have understood a hardcoded limitation to new accounts (To stop ultra-high level people from stuffing unlimited resources into new accounts), but to punish all of us with this psuedo-soviet restriction is insulting and dismissive.

I'm not going to make deals that do not benefit me, nor am I needing a 'big brother' to guide my decisions.

This is true only based on your assumption that you wish to continue playing the game.
But imagine you only came here so that you will feed a friend of yours. Without Transfer ratio it will be hard for admin to judge whether you are cheating or not.
Also the rules clearly say that giving unfair advantage is not allowed. Even if you earned it yourself, it doesnt mean that you can give as many resources to others as you wish, because you will make the game unfair for people who didn't receive the resources. Why should one player benefit by doing nothing, while someone else doesnt benefit?

The game doesnt punish if you give your resources to others. The game punishes if you give too many resources to others.

If people would not be constantly trying to feed each other and cheat, then this all would not have been necessary.

If you send 10% of what you produce, you will be fine.

Admin wrote:
FarleShadow wrote:But the TR isn;t subtle or even logical. If I choose, of my own volition, to send a lower player some of my hard-earned resources, I punish myself in the loss of those resources. If an equal rank sends me resources, he punishes himself by removing his rez.
I could hide it as has been suggested before, because i'll be using the system anyway to monitor illegal feeding, then whoever crosses the limits i'll simply ban anyway.
The only difference it will make is that when it's being showed up, people know they might get into trouble soon.

If you wish I can hide that number for you so you dont see it anymore.

It's funny how people get all upset about supervision and restrictions when these have been made transparent, but they wouldn't be criticising it at all, if it remained hidden and unknown to the world.

It could have also been done in a way that these transfer ratios remained completely unknown to all players, and the admin would simply give a permaban to everyone who reached a certain limit. But we have decided to make it transparent for everyone, so that everyone knows how they system works, a number that warns you if are doing something wrong.

No wonder governments hide so many things from its citizens.
There would be an uproar if the governments explained to its citizens how they collect data and what kind of things they know about its citizens.

[quote="Nomad"]@ Admin,,,, maybe that is an idea that needs consideration. Maybe the ratio should only display after every private trade broker transaction, or every direct send. I hate to use this as an example but it works. Similar to the way weapons damage is displayed in a SGW attack report log.

"Your Empire Financial Adviser indicates your Personal Trade Ratio went from 10.25% to 10.27% with the recent transactions made in your realm"

I like this idea.
Most people don't need the ratio anyway, as it wont be a problem for them.
This could make it better

FarleShadow wrote:
Admin wrote:
FarleShadow wrote:The Idea that the game itself should punish accounts that willingly give resources out to those who are less fortunate is silly, I could have understood a hardcoded limitation to new accounts (To stop ultra-high level people from stuffing unlimited resources into new accounts), but to punish all of us with this psuedo-soviet restriction is insulting and dismissive.
So you're ok with someone making 40 accounts and then feeding the resources, these accounts produce, to themselves?
I'll make a note of that.

Besides, how did you get to the conclusion that what's being targeted is the transfer from big players to small players instead of the other way around? I am really interested in knowing that.

What? Just because I disagree with TR doesn't mean I'm a goddamn account hoarding cheata! Are you some sort of politician?
Multiple accounts ARE cheating, using them to bolster your main account IS cheating, there is no denying that obvious fact, but if you're going to lump legitimate account holders in with those guys because they want to sent some resources about, then you might aswell close up shop all together.

I also got the conclusion that big to small is your target because I like to help out other smaller players with kuwal and units, its not alot of rez, but it makes them bigger and happier. This restriction seems to be a deliberate mark against that behavior.

No it's not. As you know small players can get a value of up to 5.000 AT and it's still allowed.
The biggest concern is small players feeding bigger ones and that's what's being combated the most.

Also, please explain, since you are again multi-accounts, but want that the game allows "legitimate" accounts to feed other accounts. How can you know which account is a multi account doing the feeding and which one is legitimate?

Capt_Blood wrote:
I think that this is a matter that does require clarification as all of the voting sites I have visited that contain a synopsis of the game advertise it as free to play and that SS is not required. While this is true it is misleading.

Looking at my own situation I currently see that my Commander percentage is slowly growing and will continue to do so. Now I could go and look for another commander but looking at the current offers it would appear that I would infact be placing myself at a disadvantage. what I see is that those without SS do not have the freedom of choice in selecting a commander that those with SS have. And what I find even more irking is that it appears that these measures have been implemented because of issues with players that do have SS.

I recommend you stay with the commander you have. Leave him once your transfer ratio comes close to 20%. I am pretty sure it will never happen if you keep playing the game.

You can play perfectly fine without SS, if you don't have SS, you can pretty much ignore transfer ratio altogether, because you will never reach the red value.

by seaborgium Tue Sep 21, 2010 8:38 pm

Kenzu wrote:There is a simple advice how to improve it: Grow!

I have a up of 50k, a total up of 60k and my ratio drops 0.04% a day. I wonder how long admin will wait for players to fix it.

thats roughly 1230 days for me to get down to 20% from my current ratio.

by Sponsored content