Alliance bank

I propose an Alliance bank system, where alliances can set up a "tax" between 1% and 5%, which will deduct that much from each member each turn, which can be later distributed accordingly or given to those who need it the most, or used in wars as emergency money for repairs, or in any way the alliance decides.

2% from the tax should be deducted as fees, just like when you deposit in your bank.

The reason why not more than 5% should be allowed is to prevent a kind of "autobanking". If alliances could set 50 or 100%, then this would obviously destroy the game. Therefore only 1-5% should be allowed.

Alliance banks are a bad ideea.
If you mean, that people can deposit kuwal at their will in alliance banks, that can be abused by multies, cheaters... urogard has an ideea of what happens in DW.

If you mean, a bank where only the custom % is deposited, then it has pros and cons. You enumerated them. And there will be one more con: the leaders could scam the entire alliance.

All in all, I think that alliance banks are not a good ideea.

PS... you could add another fee that will go to the ingame market though; being a member of an alliance, has many advantages, especially in AW, so give a small income boost to those not apartaining to an alliance, by taxing 1-2% from the alliance members income.

It can be abused in soooo many ways ..... NO

Nigatsu_Aka wrote:Alliance banks are a bad ideea.
If you mean, that people can deposit kuwal at their will in alliance banks, that can be abused by multies, cheaters... urogard has an ideea of what happens in DW.

If you mean, a bank where only the custom % is deposited, then it has pros and cons. You enumerated them. And there will be one more con: the leaders could scam the entire alliance.

All in all, I think that alliance banks are not a good ideea.

PS... you could add another fee that will go to the ingame market though; being a member of an alliance, has many advantages, especially in AW, so give a small income boost to those not apartaining to an alliance, by taxing 1-2% from the alliance members income.

If leaders abuse it, this can be exposed in the forums and he/she will loose reputation.
the alliance tax will be max 5%, so it wont pose much danger, since this is only a small fraction of the income.

the 1-2% tax for simply being in an alliance i don't really want to do as it might in some cases be a giveaway to people who are in a secret alliance

Sorry kenzu, but 5% is a lot.

example: 30 members with 30k income, means 30*5*300 kuwal/turn that could be used by the leader(s) at his(their) will... if this fee goes to the market to help the inflation, i agree with it. I`m not found of ONE/TWO person(s) controlling MY finances.

lol again, if you're in an alliance where the leader or the 2ic is using the kuwal for their own benefit, maybe time to leave that alliance?

if the alliance is crappy how will it help to change the system, changing the alliance is far simpler i think

Nigatsu_Aka wrote:Sorry kenzu, but 5% is a lot.

example: 30 members with 30k income, means 30*5*300 kuwal/turn that could be used by the leader(s) at his(their) will... if this fee goes to the market to help the inflation, i agree with it. I`m not found of ONE/TWO person(s) controlling MY finances.

how many % do you think is fine?
people can agree how finances are distributed.

lol admin... you have a point... but imo, if an alliance wants to tax their members, they can do it, without imposing it. This proposed system, would "force me to pay" but what if i don`t want to pay?

then leave the alliance and make your own where members don't pay
I mean i could also simply add a tickbox where you say if you want to pay or not into the alliance bank, tbh it would cause more problems than it would solve. (people turning it off when they need the extra kuwal, but then still claiming they payed all the time, would pointlessly create clashes in the alliance, although in that case, again, the alliance should discuss that amongst themselves. I still don't think it would be really helpful)

But i'd have to look into detail as to whether or not it would be effective or not in terms of coding and calculating income for the user and the alliance.

Nigatsu_Aka wrote:lol admin... you have a point... but imo, if an alliance wants to tax their members, they can do it, without imposing it. This proposed system, would "force me to pay" but what if i don`t want to pay?

You can leave the alliance if you dont like how they do it!

The alliance tax shouldn`t be an impediment for people to be part of one alliance. Just because "i`m greedy" with my economy, doesn`t have to be an obstacle for "me" to be part of an alliance, because there is a system that force the alliance leaders to "tax" me.

Once again... i`m not against this ideea, but i`m very against the fact that 2 people can decide what to do with x% of my income. This is the little "great" thing that many people don`t understand... how a few people control everyone else with sweet talks and promises and how they convince you that it`s for your good and for common good to "donate" and how good it is to have that... the biggest weapon... the biggest MS... and that "they" the leaders are the ones to have that weapon, because "they" are the elite... they "know" exactly what to do... got my point?

If you can, add this:

I mean i could also simply add a tickbox where you say if you want to pay or not into the alliance bank, tbh it would cause more problems than it would solve.

It is very important.

If this message doesn`t convince the "electorate" to vote against this system, then they deserve their fate to be taken as fools.

Yep .... any decent alliance has programs and credits are raised for different goals : UP increase, UU purchase, covert levels, MS, etc.

There is no need for a forced system ...... except for those who want to get their hands on more credits .... one way or the other.

Nigatsu_Aka wrote:It is very important.
If this message doesn`t convince the "electorate" to vote against this system, then they deserve their fate to be taken as fools.

Although i'm no proponent of the fascist method of the electorate voting system i still have to say this.

There's something called pure public goods, you cannot exclude people from using it (clean enviroment, standing army to protect a country) and hence people can access it without actually having to pay something for it (taxes, factory owners investing into technology to reduce pollution) resulting in the free rider problem.

Now lets say an alliance decides to focus resources to give access to a better spy level to one person, the whole alliance benefits from that when in a war. Consequently the person who decides not to pay via the ingame tax still should pay something (although they can also do it then technically via manual deposit to the bank.)
In that case it's up to every individual to make sure they are in an alliance where they are ok with how things are run and if not then there's not much you can do except leave.

I'm up for an alliance bank, as a matter of fact some parts of it are already coded, and have been since alliances were released, just have been hidden and currently the alliance bank size is meant to be 40% of the combined bank size of all members with a 5% fee on deposits.
Although personally i don't really want to be coding the automatic deposit as long as it's not above 5% of someone's income (although maybe 3% would be more appropriate). If an alliance wants to use a higher % of the alliance income then they can also make members deposit extra amounts manually in regular intervals.

the redistribution should be automated, so the leader cannot abuse (corrupt) the alliance tax. And then all weeaker member will benefit and the stronger will really be helping out other members.

What is the purpose of the tax ?

A. Redistribution of the wealth
B. Concentration to a unique powerful member
C. Upgrades that affect all members

I would rather contribute to redistribute the wealth, this would also encourage people to join alliances

If the leader can play with the numbers (quantity of kuwal) apart from tax% this can easily turn bad.

the money should be used HOW EVER the alliance choses if it is abused by the leader the members will leave simple but i also say the aliance should be able to chose what ever % they want

maby have a vote option built in for the percentage

october 17 wrote:the money should be used HOW EVER the alliance choses if it is abused by the leader the members will leave simple but i also say the aliance should be able to chose what ever % they want

maby have a vote option built in for the percentage

automation can prevent abuse, once an alliance disolves it dies for a long time.
I would like the members to choose and not just the leader, the alliance is mostly the members.
I would not like having somekind of king you pay taxes too because he needs to be all powerful to pretect the rest.
I would rather play a game where the rich and strong help the poor and weak WITHOUT sticky fingers puting in pockets during transaction. I can understand banking fees at a certain point hahahaha

So hopefully alliance leaders will consult their members before doing anything.

right from the get go i think this is a good idea yes it can be abused but that's just what game's like this are about playing with other people the good and the bad i hope this update go's forward and good work so far on the game admin

All I would ask for is if your going to give the keys to the gold to the king, then give the alliance a way to boot the king and keep their alliance.

Its a known fact a bad alliance leader can kill an alliance and keep the name. it would be bad enough to lose all your reources to a corrupt king, but to then be forced from your home and lose all the remaining resources in the alliance bank as well.

you make it out to seem worse then it is if you lose a max of 5% of your income per turn this isnt much if anyone is in my case it doesnt matter anyway coz i get hit 3-4 times a day for 300k while ive got an officer taking 18k think about it 5% or even only 3% 2% 1% you guy's make it out to seem like an arm and a leg

2nd of a few wrote:you make it out to seem worse then it is if you lose a max of 5% of your income per turn this isnt much if anyone is in my case it doesnt matter anyway coz i get hit 3-4 times a day for 300k while ive got an officer taking 18k think about it 5% or even only 3% 2% 1% you guy's make it out to seem like an arm and a leg

take 5% of your income for 30 days, then give it away and see how it feels.

I played another game and this is the set up they used there. We had a corupt king and he cost us around 2 months savings plus we lost our alliance because he wouldnt give our name back but walked away from the game.

And it wasnt automated there, it was volentary. Basicly we got a multi and a spy in our group and he did everything right and worked his way up to the alliance leader, then after a month and a half took everything we had to his main account, and went AWOL on our alliance leader account so we lost the entire alliance.

Now granted This Admin is no where near as "soft" as many other admins, but a good multi can not be detected in all honesty. Especially one who does not use proxies, but has access to 2 or more different IPS such as work and home, or in our case, he had one through his moble phone, one through his dial up for home, and one through his "business" which was DSL.

ip's is not the only way to track multi's. i know for certain that admin has got up scans for ''abnormal behavious'' and 'suspicious tranactions' etc. trust me i was playing in beta and found few flaws, and the ones i did went soon after i told them abou them.

as for alliance tax banks, i think it is a gd idea, however should be limited to 5%, 10% max max , as it could be abused by some clever people . if the alliance leader looks corrupt or you are not hapy inan alliance you shoudl leave, its what iv always done and iv never regretted it.

Nomad wrote:take 5% of your income for 30 days, then give it away and see how it feels.

I played another game and this is the set up they used there. We had a corupt king and he cost us around 2 months savings plus we lost our alliance because he wouldnt give our name back but walked away from the game.

And it wasnt automated there, it was volentary. Basicly we got a multi and a spy in our group and he did everything right and worked his way up to the alliance leader, then after a month and a half took everything we had to his main account, and went AWOL on our alliance leader account so we lost the entire alliance.

Now granted This Admin is no where near as "soft" as many other admins, but a good multi can not be detected in all honesty. Especially one who does not use proxies, but has access to 2 or more different IPS such as work and home, or in our case, he had one through his moble phone, one through his dial up for home, and one through his "business" which was DSL.

I feel this is a very important situation where people should know what my decisions would look like.

1) as chaos said, IP's are only one way of finding multies and tbh it's one of the last things on the list i look at. So whoever is naive enough to think that just using different IP makes them safe you can just aswell delete your account. With most likelyhood I won't even look at the IP logs.
Plus here is a very important fact to be mentioned about multies:
If one player makes several accounts to benefit one account in any way (attacking a player in revenge with secondary account to keep primary off the radar, sending resources, etc.) that's what is meant by multying at least in my definition.
I don't consider multying if you play 2 accounts which do not interact in any way with each other, that's simply owning 2 accounts for me.
That's afterall what 2 people in one house might be doing. However I will not be tolerating one person playing 2 accounts anyway if I find out.

2) If he was really a multi and I would have found out I would ban him, however I would not be returning anyone their kuwal as what he did with the alliance kuwal was not really cheating. Was despicable, that's true, but you gotta give it to him, he did exert significant effort and was smart enough to pull his plan through. And stealing alliance resources after a successful infiltration of said alliance is not illegal, it's part of the game, could be just aswell done by an enemy alliance to steal some alliance's funds.
So in short:
He'd get banned for multying
Kuwal NOT returned as no cheating involved in that

3) Alliance matters are internal and I don't meddle in internal affairs, if you are not fine with how alliance represents your interests or your resources then it is your AND ONLY YOUR choice whether to leave or to stay, if you join an alliance where someone ran off with all the kuwal you put into the bank then it's a lesson to be learnt for you but nothing that would need punishment or correction from the side of the Administration. Now as I already said, some parts of the bank are already coded and have been since alliance function got released in BETA stage, I will eventually add the rest but most likely after/along with P2P Transfer release.