The Imperium Empire Farming Policy - 40hours & Counting.

Lol, here is a practical example of the policy in affect.

Sara has a Defensive Action 11,621,658,132.

Her techs are: Defence 173%, Covert 161%, Assassin 160%, Attack 168%.

Under TIE's rules of engagements for its members, she needs 175% average techs. She currently has (173 + 161 + 160 + 168) /4 = 165.5% techs.

Stars recently hit her:


18 Sep] 14:05 Sara 6,408,020,050 Kuwal Stolen 10 1183 7284 10,570,970,689 8,055,405,132

As you can see, the attack was repelled by a defence roughly 20% more powerful.... so Sara would have had out about (6.4 x 1.2) 8billion kuwal.

Her AE would be about 50.50% - she has:

Farmers: 13,438,407 - 339,319,776
Workers: 823,000 - 24,936,900
Miners 439,000 - 15,518,650.

Total Income: 379,675,326 - not including weapons upkeep costs... which since she has 725,668 MBT's thats 34,922,772 kuwal a turn - not including kuwal to officers.

So basically - 8,000,000,000 / (379,675,326 - 34,922,772 = 344,752,554) = 23+ turns worth of income out.

Thats close to 12hours without logging in. Stars hit cost him 4,647,192,000 kuwal... so a profit of 1,760,828,050 kuwal.

Kenzu has asked for compensation - Sara will get 0.

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

If Kenzu wishes to take World Republic to war over this hit, or similar hits... he is welcome to do so.

Let him explain to his members that a TIE member made a very profitable (can buy 10k UU with it) hit on someone who couldn't be bothered to bank for 12+hours - and that is why they will now be facing another 3month+ long war of having their account's set back, and generally used as cannon-fodder or otherwise a kuwal farm.

I m a kind hearted soul though, so I ll make a compromise for Kenzu in the best of intentions:

For those hits done in breach of T.O.C policy, if they are for less than 16turns worth of income (if the strike is repelled I.e. only part of the kuwal out is stolen)... TIE will at the least look at them and consider offerring *some* % of compensation.

For hits which are not repelled... if its for less than 19 turns worth, TIE will at the least look at them and consider offerring *some* % of compensation.

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

So... yeah, I ll be seeing you.

In the mean-time I would point out TIE's invited Kenzu/TOC to propose a rational/logical solution to the above, or to respond to my income units x 150 = profit margin suggestion.... but so far Kenzu's chosen to completely ignore those bits of my post offerring to discuss & find a decent compromise, and instead focused on the "Nasty TIE's bullying us again by wanting to profitable farm barely active players" approach as well as the "farm our barely active members and we ll mass you" approach.

Sorry, can I just get this straightened out here, but this thread is basically saying to be considered 'active' you have to log in every 9-12 hours.

And if you don't log in consistantly every 9-12 hours, you are 'barely active active players', right?

FarleShadow wrote:Sorry, can I just get this straightened out here, but this thread is basically saying to be considered 'active' you have to log in every 9-12 hours.

And if you don't log in consistantly every 9-12 hours, you are 'barely active active players', right?

No, its saying to be considered active you need to have logged in 9 - 12hours with normal income settings. If you go longer than 9 or 12hours without logging in... then to be honest you should at least consider using worker motivation or a realm alert level... and if you don't, and then get profitably hit.... I honestly don't think you can complain.

About 16.5 hours of relaxed income is roughly the same as 11hours of normal income. So if we say a normal active player logs in once every 11hours and has a "normal" income... in reality a player on relaxed or realm alert can probably log in every 16 or 17hours and have a similar amount of kuwal out as a normal player....

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

I ll be honest here: I would be VERY much in favour of seeing TIE & TOC adopt a common policy based on activity times.

Acceptable Activity = 20 Turns worth of "normal" income (worked out based on player's income units). Those with less than 20 turns worth of income out the profit margin is income unit x 150.

Less Active = Those above 20 turns worth of "normal" income out. Profit Margin = 250million.

Someone who wanted to be classed as acceptable activity would merely need to use relaxed/realm alert to adjust their income slightly and thus.. in reality they could have gone 26 turns without logging in before they d have the level of income out to be classed as less active.

Those who get farmed before they have the "less active" amount of kuwal out would have to be farmed by the income unit x 150 = profit margin rule so wouldn't be effected.

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

Sadly... I suspect the above will never be agreed to by Kenzu/WR... and thus, without agreement, there is only one choice left to TIE - to simply push ahead with something anyway.

I would just say Kenzu stop being a multi and just play 1 account in my opinion. Messaging me on Sara pretending to be another is sorta sad.

stars wrote:I would just say Kenzu stop being a multi and just play 1 account in my opinion. Messaging me on Sara pretending to be another is sorta sad.

I am no multi, you farmed sara on 18th september for 1 billion profit, while 2.4 billion profit was required.

If you haven't realised Sara is my wife.
If you want to see a cheater then have a look at your own tranfer ratio.

Now stop making trouble and pay

Woah hold it there kenzu.

Players from TIE with high rates aren't cheaters. We used a tatic during that war that at the time was allowed. It is now that admin says that its a no no.

Its sad that some get there rears kicked and then changes get made.
This isn't the first time I have seen this either.

Kenzu wrote:

stars wrote:I would just say Kenzu stop being a multi and just play 1 account in my opinion. Messaging me on Sara pretending to be another is sorta sad.

I am no multi, you farmed sara on 18th september for 1 billion profit, while 2.4 billion profit was required.

If you haven't realised Sara is my wife.
If you want to see a cheater then have a look at your own tranfer ratio.

Now stop making trouble and pay

lol Kenzu now now according to the rules logging in on your wife account and visa verca is cheating and your CHEATING we already know that everyone to bad admin allows it. Again proof of Admin biased.

seaborgium wrote:Woah hold it there kenzu.

Players from TIE with high rates aren't cheaters. We used a tatic during that war that at the time was allowed. It is now that admin says that its a no no.

Its sad that some get there rears kicked and then changes get made.
This isn't the first time I have seen this either.

Yes like this Trade policy to catch the socalled "Feeders and Cheaters" we all know is not true. Its used to do what Kenzu just did against the players at will.

Kenzu wrote:

stars wrote:I would just say Kenzu stop being a multi and just play 1 account in my opinion. Messaging me on Sara pretending to be another is sorta sad.

I am no multi, you farmed sara on 18th september for 1 billion profit, while 2.4 billion profit was required.

If you haven't realised Sara is my wife.
If you want to see a cheater then have a look at your own tranfer ratio.

Now stop making trouble and pay

Kenzu, you might well get massed for accusing Stars of being a cheater.

His ratio is better than mine - mine currently stands at 48.78 %.

And thats when I ve only done 1 broker & 1 sent trade since admin's transfer update - the first broker giving away 60billion kuwal for 1 kuwal, and second sent trade me sending about 89billion or something away.

I actually think the transfer ratio doesn't work to be honest - given on the 19th of September (before i sent the 89billion away) it was 48.75%. So its gone up... when I haven't brought anything at all.... which is even more confusing when my ratio with my officers is 74ish% - and my ratio with my commander a mere 110%.

So... don't go accusing people of cheating. I suspect your own ratio may be above 120% given you had all of World Republic broker you resources during the TIE-TOC war... no different to the strategy which increased Stars to such an extent...

Either way Kenzu - I d watch your account very very carefully when your away from it for now on, you might just be receiving visitors - lots and lots of visitors armed with Main Battle Tanks with the intent to annihilate your defence, spies & assassins.

I HATE with vengeance people who accuse others of being cheaters with no basis to them. You just accused Stars of being a cheater... and therefore accused anyone else with a ratio similar to his or above of being cheaters...

Lol, Just incase Kenzu chose to purposefully ignore the attempts by The Imperium to try and find a mutual solution to this "issue" which doesn't involve World Republic telling us we can't profitably farm their barely active members, here's a summary of attempts by The Imperium to involve Kenzu & WR into putting forward a suggestion:

ian wrote: Until 2pm UK GMT Tuesday the 21st of September, the agreed upon TIE & TOC farming policy will continue to be in effect - this is the period in which any rational & logical input can be given in order to *possibly* allow some amendments to take effect before the policy is implemented

ian wrote:That said, if you have a suggestion for a new policy which will allow farming to actually happen against highly militarized (in terms of % of army size) accounts if they haven't logged in for a reasonable time frame (i.e. 8 or 9 hours), then please do make it.

Mindless protesting at what is done (TIE's new policy) won't change anything. It only makes us more determined in upholding it.

Logical suggestions which attempt to deal with our issues, while allowing you to have a semi-satisfactory position, is welcome.

Personally I had a possible brain wave of *total income* units x 13 x weapons level = profit margin.

Logic:

- Weapon level = reflects investment a player's made into their "core" military, coupled with replacing weapons being a largish part of the repair costs to replace lost defence if farmed... so it makes sense for a person with a better weapon level to have a higher profit margin.

- Income Units = They are what actually make the income. Other units don't. It should really only be they which are factored into any profit margin as a result...

ian wrote:In the mean-time I would point out TIE's invited Kenzu/TOC to propose a rational/logical solution to the above, or to respond to my income units x 150 = profit margin suggestion.... but so far Kenzu's chosen to completely ignore those bits of my post offerring to discuss & find a decent compromise, and instead focused on the "Nasty TIE's bullying us again by wanting to profitable farm barely active players" approach as well as the "farm our barely active members and we ll mass you" approach.

ian wrote:I ll be honest here: I would be VERY much in favour of seeing TIE & TOC adopt a common policy based on activity times.

Acceptable Activity = 20 Turns worth of "normal" income (worked out based on player's income units). Those with less than 20 turns worth of income out the profit margin is income unit x 150.

Less Active = Those above 20 turns worth of "normal" income out. Profit Margin = 250million.

Someone who wanted to be classed as acceptable activity would merely need to use relaxed/realm alert to adjust their income slightly and thus.. in reality they could have gone 26 turns without logging in before they d have the level of income out to be classed as less active.

Those who get farmed before they have the "less active" amount of kuwal out would have to be farmed by the income unit x 150 = profit margin rule so wouldn't be effected.

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

Sadly... I suspect the above will never be agreed to by Kenzu/WR... and thus, without agreement, there is only one choice left to TIE - to simply push ahead with something anyway.

Last but not least, the following PM was sent to Kenzu last night:

ian wrote:Hey

If you don't like the current TIE policy I would suggest you make a suggestion which would allow TIE to farm your less active members after they ve got about 11 or 12 hours of "normal" (i.e. non relaxed/ non realm alert) income out for a minimum of 250million profit.

But don't for a second hold any illusion that TIE is *not* going to farm player's who ve got 11 or 12hours of "normal" income out if they can be farmed profitably (250million+) just because you & World Republic says its not allowed.

Farming of players for about 8 or 9hours income out for only 250million profit I can understand & happen to agree with you is generally unacceptable (unless they ve got a poor defence).

But trying to tell TIE we can't profitably farm players for 11 or 12+hours worth of normal (or about 16 or 18hours of relaxed) income is unacceptable - regardless of what the now terminated TIE-TOC farming policy used to state.

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

Thus, you have only 3 choices:

1.) Start massing TIE members who breach your policy. This will result in a immediate declaration of war by The Imperium against World Republic (and IF they participated in the massings - Mujengen).

2.) Put up with & accept TIE's new policy... and contact us about any hits you feel while in TIE's policy were out of line (i.e. if they were attacks for only about 8 or 9 hours worth of normal income) - as we *may* be inclined to do something since honestly... all we want to be able to do is farm your less active members (in addittion to what we could already do with the old TIE-TOC policy).

3.) Put forward a reasonable suggestion which meets TIE's needs and satisfies TOC's needs.

Either way... The Imperium does not want war... but we will fight one if we must.

I would also remind you incidentally.. that regarding breaches of the (now terminated) TIE-TOC policy your supposed to forward warning PM's sent to the breacher to the alliance-leader.

So even if what you say is true - regarding the TIE-TOC treaty not being allowed to be changed by TIE, and therefore still in effect - you ll actually have failed to follow the correct procedure anyway i.e. you messaged stars and failed to contact me.

I ll be forwarding this message to Lord Ishurue so he is aware of where TIE stands. Its not aimed at him/Mujengen really.... but more at yourself/ WR.

Either way - the old state of affairs of TIE being farmed, and struggling to find T.O.C targets (even those who ve gone much longer without logging in) to farm back due to the TOC policy - is over & unacceptable to return back to.

The choice is yours... but TIE will not tolerate WR trying to stop us farming less active players (not logging in for 12+ hours worth of normal income) when it can be done so profitably... and even more so when the WR members in question can just do what the rest of AW does... and actually make use of the relaxed/overtime buttons to adjust income....

His response (or lack of) to the points in the quotes from this thread you you all can see for yourselves. His response to the PM sent to himself:

"Treaties treating all players equally are equal. What you are trying to achieve is a treaty where you treat us worse than yourself."

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

I m just making sure its very clear therefore to everyone:

- The Imperium gave World Republic 40hours notice before we implemented this new policy, and invited rational and logical suggestions to be put forward to change it before it was actually implemented.

- After The Imperium implemented this policy, we ve repeatedly asked for Kenzu & World Republic to make suggestions for the adoption of a different one if they don't like it - and so far all they ve said is essentially:

1.) TIE's breaking the TIE-TOC agreed policy - despite our terminating it, or for that matter Mujengen changing it beforehand anyway (implying its no longer relevant before TIE even terminated it).

2.) Big Nasty TIE is trying to treat WR unfairly again

3.) Logging in every 12hours or so is good activity

4.) TIE obviously wants war and is TIE mobilising for war? - see this pm:

Spoiler:

5.) If TIE members break TOC's farming policy T.O.C will mass those players who break it.

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

Noone should be under any illusion here: Kenzu & WR are now deliberately avoiding putting forward their own suggestions/solutions to the problem, and instead are insisting on hanging onto a policy which fails to distinguish between protecting active players from being farmed during relatively short-periods of not logging in (i.e. 8 or 9hours when they are sleeping), and protecting smaller less active poorly-balanced-strong defence focused accounts from being farmed during extended periods of inactivity i.e. 12 or 13+hours.

Anyone else outside of T.O.C could realistically expect to be farmed if they don't log in for 10+hours, let alone 12+hours. I know I used to be... resulting in my having to use relaxed & over-time motivation to prevent Vaga (Mujengen i.e. TOC) farming me. Its only when I ve finally built a 6billion+ 170% Defence Tech defence that I can now have normal income at night - normally for a maximum of 8hours or so. After that I ll fall outside of TIE's policy protection and will get farmed - probably by Vaga lol.

TIE isn't being unreasonable for wanting a policy which allows us to hit *profitably* (minimum 250million profit) those TOC players who's activity is low (10 or 11+hours of not banking while on *normal* income). Especially when all the T.O.C players in question need to do is essentially make use of relaxed & overtime income adjustments to modify their income if they DO have problems with being farmed.

As Kenzu has said on this thread (and in the past on other threads) - he feels player's should not be forced to use relaxed/overtime income to avoid being profitably farmed. He feels its World Republic's manifest destiny to protect players who don't log in for extended periods of time from being farmed.... even when they can be farmed profitably. He feels profitably farming of those poor activity players is essentially forcing TIE's game strategy and way of playing onto those players.... and completely fails to recognise that its actually him forcing something "non-natural"

Spoiler:

on TIE when it comes to farming of poor activity players.

So.. I ll say it again. If World Republic doesn't like TIE's policy - suggest a solution which IS reasonable.

Untill then... we ll just follow our own policy, regardless of any complaints or threats WR may make.

Another 8hours later and still not a single suggestion by Kenzu with regard to finding a satisfactory solution for a farming policy to provide some extra protection to normal activity players, without then providing additional protection to less active players.

In essence: We want a policy which would allow a player to go (if they have a reasonable defence to match their income) 9 or 10hours not being farmed without logging in & without using worker-motivation to adjust income.

The old TIE-TOC policy is pretty effective in providing sufficient protection to balanced accounts (i.e. about 85%+ army size trained as income units) with reasonable defences to go maybe 8 or 9hours without logging in & without using realm alert without the fear of being farmed.

But it also had the effect of offering much more poorly balanced account's - i.e. player's who say have a 2million army size and 4billion+ defence, or players such as previously quoted at 11billion defence with under 5million army sizes - basically players with over 15% of their army size invested in military & therefore not making income - with much greater protection simply by allowing them to go anywhere over 12 or 13hours without logging in & without using realm alert without the fear of being farmed....

TIE is made of normal balanced account's mainly... thus often any of our members who go above 8 or 9hours of normal income out will get farmed. *Some* members in T.O.C are the same... but the majority of World Republic fall into the second category and thus receive a much greater degree of protection.

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

TIE's stance is that of a alliance policy which provides reasonable protection (8 or 9hours of normal income) which places activity at the heart of the policy.

Such a policy should not discriminate in the level of protection offered based simply on because a bunch of player's choose to train a very large portion of their army size as non-income generatoring units, thereby gaining a much higher degree of protection (in terms of how long they can go without banking/logging in before they are at risk of being farmed) than those who build balanced accounts.

To TIE... this is unacceptable. Especially when for us to achieve roughly similar %'s (20- 25%ish) of our army size trained in the military sector's as what many in TOC have, we d be talking about over 60million+ of our army size being killable in the event of a preemptive strike... and for most of our members - at least having 1.5million+ killable units - and for members like myself, arne & Stars - over 5million killable units.

The lost economic generation would kill us alone. Let alone loosing such massive portions of our army size if someone decides to attack us (which there is a precedent for). Thus... the tactic which World Republic loves doing - having their player's invest about 20 or 25% of their army sizes into military's, giving them disproportionately high defences coupled with disproportionately low incomes, making them largely unfarmable with the old TIE-TOC policy - is not open to us.

Many of WR's members are under 3million army size. Loosing 20% of a 3million army is 600k UU - about 2 weeks worth of raiding for them. A 6 million army size TIE member loosing 20% of their army size is 1.2million - about 4 weeks, not factoring in the costs of potentially twice as many weapons & training twice as many supers/spies/assassins, when having less than double the income due to AE....

Therefore... its simple maths. We can't ever hope to have similar levels of military concentration as WR/ some other's in TOC achieve with their army sizes for 3 simple reasons:

1.) Lost Economic Generation. The impact would be far greater for TIE due to our much higher army sizes. Not to mention AE would make thing's even worse (it would still factor in the "military" non-income units into the army size, thereby influencing the AE which would impact the member's income...).

2.) The ability to recover from the effects of war. Once a defence is built its built, it can't be undone unless massed. If you have a built defence, your committed to having to have the necessary spies/assassins to defend it. I dread to think the costs for TIE members to replace if we opted to train similar % of our army sizes into our military as WR is....one thing is for certain though: It would be much easier for WR/TOC members (who generally are far smaller than TIE members) to recover than it would be for TIE members.

3.) Mujengen would never tolerate TIE making itself unfarmable to the same extent as WR is. Thus... they d do exactly what we are doing now - and adjust the policy to render such a tactic less effective.

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

For all of Kenzu's rattling on about TIE being able to do what WR does if we wanted to... its simply not possible. It would be nothing short of a massively expensive and in the long-run suicidal means to ensure the greatest massacre on the game takes place - at the expense of TIE.

The larger the defence - the heavier the losses for an attacker, and therefore the more kuwal out needed to be stolen to make a profit.

The larger the defence, the larger the strike needed to farm that defence (a strike 60% of a defence will only steal 60% of the kuwal out... so a 80% one = would steal 80% instead). Incidentally, it just so happens EVERY single time more than one or two people in TIE start arming largish strikes, or otherwise increasing their existing strikes.... TOC as a collective goes into panic mode and accuses TIE of preparing for war....

The more units trained in military, the less income.

Less Income Units + Larger Defence + "Required" Policy Profit Margin = More Turns worth of Income needed in order to make a person farmable - thereby allowing them to go longer periods of inactivity before being policy-farmable.

TIE simply wants to eliminate the "Required" Policy Profit Margin bit from the equation for those TOC members with lower activity/ poorly developed accounts -thereby making them farmable based only on game mechanics... while more-active but more balanced account's will continue to benefit from the required policy-profit margin... hopefully resulting in both sets of player's having similar levels of protection from farming overall.

In the mean-time, untill WR actually starts being reasonable and presents a solution to the issue - If WR does something stupid like massing a TIE member for breaking their policy, they ll only have themselves to blame for starting the 3rd TIE-WR war... or (if Mujengen become involved), the 2nd TIE-TOC war....

ian wrote:

Kenzu wrote:

stars wrote:I would just say Kenzu stop being a multi and just play 1 account in my opinion. Messaging me on Sara pretending to be another is sorta sad.

I am no multi, you farmed sara on 18th september for 1 billion profit, while 2.4 billion profit was required.

If you haven't realised Sara is my wife.
If you want to see a cheater then have a look at your own tranfer ratio.

Now stop making trouble and pay

Kenzu, you might well get massed for accusing Stars of being a cheater.

His ratio is better than mine - mine currently stands at 48.78 %.

And thats when I ve only done 1 broker & 1 sent trade since admin's transfer update - the first broker giving away 60billion kuwal for 1 kuwal, and second sent trade me sending about 89billion or something away.

I actually think the transfer ratio doesn't work to be honest - given on the 19th of September (before i sent the 89billion away) it was 48.75%. So its gone up... when I haven't brought anything at all.... which is even more confusing when my ratio with my officers is 74ish% - and my ratio with my commander a mere 110%.

So... don't go accusing people of cheating. I suspect your own ratio may be above 120% given you had all of World Republic broker you resources during the TIE-TOC war... no different to the strategy which increased Stars to such an extent...

Either way Kenzu - I d watch your account very very carefully when your away from it for now on, you might just be receiving visitors - lots and lots of visitors armed with Main Battle Tanks with the intent to annihilate your defence, spies & assassins.

I HATE with vengeance people who accuse others of being cheaters with no basis to them. You just accused Stars of being a cheater... and therefore accused anyone else with a ratio similar to his or above of being cheaters...

My transfer ratio is 17.03 %
Admin can confirm this

The war-excuse is a lame excuse, because if it was a true that you help each other in the war in a fair way, then sometimes members would feed some guys, and sometimes they would feed other guys and if done in a fair way, it would balance out eventually. But what do we see? We see that they always feed the same guys and these guys don't return what they have received in any war.

To me people who gain an advantage by having others (multies, people who quit, "friends" who play to feed them, people who play to earn cash) send resources to them without paying a fair amount of resources back, are feeders.

Feeders are hidden cheaters, because they gain an unfair advantage and are outgrowing hard working honest players with little or no effort.

Kenzu wrote:My transfer ratio is 17.03 %
Admin can confirm this

You don't really think anyone is going to trust you or admin? While I do think admin is trying to be fair. We have have seen the messages you sent out to get resources. We have had many WR players say they never got anything from you.

Kenzu wrote:But what do we see? We see that they always feed the same guys and these guys don't return what they have received in any war.

How do you return things that are lost?

seaborgium wrote:

Kenzu wrote:My transfer ratio is 17.03 %
Admin can confirm this

You don't really think anyone is going to trust you or admin? While I do think admin is trying to be fair. We have have seen the messages you sent out to get resources. We have had many WR players say they never got anything from you.

Lol Admin being or trying to be FAIR please he helps Kenzu and allows him to do things we others players can't.

Kenzu wrote:But what do we see? We see that they always feed the same guys and these guys don't return what they have received in any war.

How do you return things that are lost?

Anywho.

Kenzu wrote:

ian wrote:

Kenzu wrote:

stars wrote:I would just say Kenzu stop being a multi and just play 1 account in my opinion. Messaging me on Sara pretending to be another is sorta sad.

I am no multi, you farmed sara on 18th september for 1 billion profit, while 2.4 billion profit was required.

If you haven't realised Sara is my wife.
If you want to see a cheater then have a look at your own tranfer ratio.

Now stop making trouble and pay

Kenzu, you might well get massed for accusing Stars of being a cheater.

His ratio is better than mine - mine currently stands at 48.78 %.

And thats when I ve only done 1 broker & 1 sent trade since admin's transfer update - the first broker giving away 60billion kuwal for 1 kuwal, and second sent trade me sending about 89billion or something away.

I actually think the transfer ratio doesn't work to be honest - given on the 19th of September (before i sent the 89billion away) it was 48.75%. So its gone up... when I haven't brought anything at all.... which is even more confusing when my ratio with my officers is 74ish% - and my ratio with my commander a mere 110%.

So... don't go accusing people of cheating. I suspect your own ratio may be above 120% given you had all of World Republic broker you resources during the TIE-TOC war... no different to the strategy which increased Stars to such an extent...

Either way Kenzu - I d watch your account very very carefully when your away from it for now on, you might just be receiving visitors - lots and lots of visitors armed with Main Battle Tanks with the intent to annihilate your defence, spies & assassins.

I HATE with vengeance people who accuse others of being cheaters with no basis to them. You just accused Stars of being a cheater... and therefore accused anyone else with a ratio similar to his or above of being cheaters...

My transfer ratio is 17.03 %
Admin can confirm this

The war-excuse is a lame excuse, because if it was a true that you help each other in the war in a fair way, then sometimes members would feed some guys, and sometimes they would feed other guys and if done in a fair way, it would balance out eventually. But what do we see? We see that they always feed the same guys and these guys don't return what they have received in any war.

To me people who gain an advantage by having others (multies, people who quit, "friends" who play to feed them, people who play to earn cash) send resources to them without paying a fair amount of resources back, are feeders.

Feeders are hidden cheaters, because they gain an unfair advantage and are outgrowing hard working honest players with little or no effort.

Waite waite if a friend of mine QUIT the game for good and therefore give me his RESOURCES is wrong and CHEATING Kenzu your really being going out on a limp there.

If my officer and best friend Revos stopped wanting to play for good and delete his account i would honestly ask him to give me his resources so they at least would be of use in the game. Thats not CHEATINg or a unfair advantage jesus.

Heck trading with resources between games aren't either it can be compared to trading for $$ betwen 2 players thats not unfair either its pure trade.

Kenzu your really having a problem here because this is lunitich i hear heck you remind me of another paranoid person named ADMIN who is destroying his own game hunting honest players instead of the real cheaters.

Nimras wrote:Heck trading with resources between games aren't either it can be compared to trading for $$ betwen 2 players thats not unfair either its pure trade.

It has been the rules that you can't keep selling

ian wrote:Incase anyone wants a summarized version:

Untrained Unit Rate = 175,000

When Farming Imperium Members: Profit Requirement is army size x 150

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

Farming Done by Imperium Members = Need only make 250million profit.

Exception to Farming Done by The Imperium:

If you have a satisfactory Tech level. Satisfactory = 11% average techs for every 1billion defence power. I.e.
player with 4billion defence power = needs a average of 144% techs.

Anyone with techs above 175% will fall under the army size x 150 profit rule regardless of defence power (i.e. 8billion defence will only need 175% average techs).

Average techs = 4 techs added together/ 4 i.e. attack, covert, defence, assassins

If a player satisfies this... then the profit requirement is army size x 150.

This doesn't include personal bonus points by the way incase anyone is wondering

I will have to say IAN the part marked in red and bold is bullocks.

I find that wrong your farmin policy are not treating everyone equal and you defend with TIE is better than ToC not in this area.

Muj is not willing to pay back easely and like to argue over petty things that is clear is a breach. But this hmm.

Kenzu wrote:

ian wrote:

Kenzu wrote:

stars wrote:I would just say Kenzu stop being a multi and just play 1 account in my opinion. Messaging me on Sara pretending to be another is sorta sad.

I am no multi, you farmed sara on 18th september for 1 billion profit, while 2.4 billion profit was required.

If you haven't realised Sara is my wife.
If you want to see a cheater then have a look at your own tranfer ratio.

Now stop making trouble and pay

Kenzu, you might well get massed for accusing Stars of being a cheater.

His ratio is better than mine - mine currently stands at 48.78 %.

And thats when I ve only done 1 broker & 1 sent trade since admin's transfer update - the first broker giving away 60billion kuwal for 1 kuwal, and second sent trade me sending about 89billion or something away.

I actually think the transfer ratio doesn't work to be honest - given on the 19th of September (before i sent the 89billion away) it was 48.75%. So its gone up... when I haven't brought anything at all.... which is even more confusing when my ratio with my officers is 74ish% - and my ratio with my commander a mere 110%.

So... don't go accusing people of cheating. I suspect your own ratio may be above 120% given you had all of World Republic broker you resources during the TIE-TOC war... no different to the strategy which increased Stars to such an extent...

Either way Kenzu - I d watch your account very very carefully when your away from it for now on, you might just be receiving visitors - lots and lots of visitors armed with Main Battle Tanks with the intent to annihilate your defence, spies & assassins.

I HATE with vengeance people who accuse others of being cheaters with no basis to them. You just accused Stars of being a cheater... and therefore accused anyone else with a ratio similar to his or above of being cheaters...

My transfer ratio is 17.03 %
Admin can confirm this

The war-excuse is a lame excuse, because if it was a true that you help each other in the war in a fair way, then sometimes members would feed some guys, and sometimes they would feed other guys and if done in a fair way, it would balance out eventually. But what do we see? We see that they always feed the same guys and these guys don't return what they have received in any war.

To me people who gain an advantage by having others (multies, people who quit, "friends" who play to feed them, people who play to earn cash) send resources to them without paying a fair amount of resources back, are feeders.

Feeders are hidden cheaters, because they gain an unfair advantage and are outgrowing hard working honest players with little or no effort.

Many of those with high ratio's also brought resources for $$$, or did cross-server trades when they were legal. I.e. I brought about 5.5million UU from Survivor in exchange for $100 about 2months before the TIE-TOC war began. Many other's did $$$ trades for resources as well when it was legal, and when admin didn't have a problem with it (he basically had a forum section for $$$ trades to take place).

Are you now saying I m a cheater Kenzu?

As for the war-resources. Don't be a fool. Your not going to distribute resources back to players if you ve used them to arm up strikes & then mass down the enemy defences, or lost the weapons & supers you used the resources for while hunting assassins. The only reason some people provided resources and other's recieved... would have been based on their level of development I.e. attack technologies etc...

Someone who's a 130% attack tech player would be not very-good at assaulting down defences, while a 170% attack tech player would be much better. Do you seriously expect any decent alliance to basically have the 130% attack tech player do not-that much towards the war-effort, while expecting the 170% attack tech player to themselves find the resources necessary to carry most of the burden of initially knocking down enemy defences to open up those target-players to less developed player's for attack?

Any decent alliance would try to get ALL involved into the war-effort - whether its the 130% attack tech player providing some funds to the 170% attack tech player, allowing him to mass players... which in turn then allows the 130% attack tech player to move in to mop up income units & farm/raid. That is simply how war is fought on this game....

Also, did it ever occur to you some of the resources player's like stars received was given to him with the intention of investing into his actual account, to allow him to better fight? I know I personally gave him about 50billion for techs at one point in the T.O.C-TIE war. You may not grasp the concept of "team-work" and "self-sacrifice", but other's willingly and knowingly sometimes provide resources to other's to help them out I.e. I happily brought Seaborgium a personal-bonus change for $10 (and for free i.e. no resources in exchange) during the war, knowing he was going to leave TIE after it - why d I do that? 1.) To help the war-effort, 2.) Because he's a friend.

If people choose to help other's, they are NOT feeders. The ONLY thing which makes games like Aderan Wars playable is the human element & human traits. Without it... its just a bunch of images and lines of codes - and wouldn't stand a chance against other "graphical" games. Its the human interactive side of games like this that make them enjoyable & interesting to play...

Nimras wrote:

ian wrote:Incase anyone wants a summarized version:

Untrained Unit Rate = 175,000

When Farming Imperium Members: Profit Requirement is army size x 150

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

Farming Done by Imperium Members = Need only make 250million profit.

Exception to Farming Done by The Imperium:

If you have a satisfactory Tech level. Satisfactory = 11% average techs for every 1billion defence power. I.e.
player with 4billion defence power = needs a average of 144% techs.

Anyone with techs above 175% will fall under the army size x 150 profit rule regardless of defence power (i.e. 8billion defence will only need 175% average techs).

Average techs = 4 techs added together/ 4 i.e. attack, covert, defence, assassins

If a player satisfies this... then the profit requirement is army size x 150.

This doesn't include personal bonus points by the way incase anyone is wondering

I will have to say IAN the part marked in red and bold is bullocks.

I find that wrong your farmin policy are not treating everyone equal and you defend with TIE is better than ToC not in this area.

Muj is not willing to pay back easely and like to argue over petty things that is clear is a breach. But this hmm.

Actually Lord Ishurue has said he doesn't see a problem with TIE's policy. TIE itself has asked for suggestions from Kenzu & other's on alternatives to achieve the desired effect. The desired effect simply being:

- To have a farming policy which offers ALL players additional protection - on top of the ordinary game mechanics - to allow them to go maybe 9 or 10hours on normal income without fear of being farmed *provided* they have a adequate defence to match their income.

The army size x 150 policy achieves that.... but also due to some player's having disproportionately low amount of income units vs. their actual army size, and disproportionately high defences vs. their income - then the "extra" protection offerred by the policy essentially makes it so players like that can go anything between 11 and 14hours normally without logging in and on normal income before they become farmable under the policy.

TIE's policy by and large is designed to only affect those with poor techs i.e. the sort of players who opt for high amounts of lower-tech military units... who just happen to be the above "disproportionately low amounts of income units vs. army size" & "disproportionately high defences vs. income" players generally i.e. the one's who under the old policy received disproportionately high levels of protection.

Incase anyone missed it - a poor-activity 3million army size player who due to that poor activity is so small, with 20% in military will loose 600k UU if massed - about 2 weeks of raiding.

A 6million army size player i.e. larger because he's more active - will loose about 1.2million of his army size if massed if he has 20% in military - about 4 weeks of raiding. Factor in the extra costs of arming & training the units, while at the same time NOT having twice the income (due to AE)... then that player could never recover as easily as the 3million army size player. So for that 6million army size player - adopting the tactic of having high levels of military units vs. army size is not a option.

Thus he's much more vulnerable to being farmed under the old TIE-TOC policy agreement. Its simply completely wrong that more active players are farmable even when using worker motivation to alter income, while less active players get to sit with normal income for far longer periods.

TIE's policy is far from perfect - which is why we ve invited Kenzu & everyone else to put forward a suggestion/solution. Your also right - it doesn't treat TOC fairly at all - it discriminates against those TOC players with poor technologies (TOC player's with "adequate" technologies get treated exactly like TIE btw).

Then again.... lets not forget that the old TIE-TOC policy basically discriminated against TIE due to our much larger army sizes - which made doing what WR does (high % of army size in military) impossible.. and which consequently, has always allowed reasonable amounts of farming of TIE to take place, while at the same time - large chunks of TOC are effectively unfarmable.

Kenzu keeps insisting on having this discriminatory policy remain in effect. Thats not gonna happen - and TIE's response is our OWN policy, which we are prepared to enforce - even if it results in war with WR/TOC.

So... again, Kenzu/WR is welcome to put forward a reasonable suggestion. So far its only Lord Ishurue who seems to be trying to find a solution... while all Kenzu keeps doing is threatening to mass TIE members who break WR's discriminatory policy.

seaborgium wrote:

Nimras wrote:Heck trading with resources between games aren't either it can be compared to trading for $$ betwen 2 players thats not unfair either its pure trade.

It has been the rules that you can't keep selling

Lol I want to be able to sell and trade as i see fit.

ian wrote:

Nimras wrote:

ian wrote:Incase anyone wants a summarized version:

Untrained Unit Rate = 175,000

When Farming Imperium Members: Profit Requirement is army size x 150

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

Farming Done by Imperium Members = Need only make 250million profit.

Exception to Farming Done by The Imperium:

If you have a satisfactory Tech level. Satisfactory = 11% average techs for every 1billion defence power. I.e.
player with 4billion defence power = needs a average of 144% techs.

Anyone with techs above 175% will fall under the army size x 150 profit rule regardless of defence power (i.e. 8billion defence will only need 175% average techs).

Average techs = 4 techs added together/ 4 i.e. attack, covert, defence, assassins

If a player satisfies this... then the profit requirement is army size x 150.

This doesn't include personal bonus points by the way incase anyone is wondering

I will have to say IAN the part marked in red and bold is bullocks.

I find that wrong your farmin policy are not treating everyone equal and you defend with TIE is better than ToC not in this area.

Muj is not willing to pay back easely and like to argue over petty things that is clear is a breach. But this hmm.

Actually Lord Ishurue has said he doesn't see a problem with TIE's policy. TIE itself has asked for suggestions from Kenzu & other's on alternatives to achieve the desired effect. The desired effect simply being:

- To have a farming policy which offers ALL players additional protection - on top of the ordinary game mechanics - to allow them to go maybe 9 or 10hours on normal income without fear of being farmed *provided* they have a adequate defence to match their income.

The army size x 150 policy achieves that.... but also due to some player's having disproportionately low amount of income units vs. their actual army size, and disproportionately high defences vs. their income - then the "extra" protection offerred by the policy essentially makes it so players like that can go anything between 11 and 14hours normally without logging in and on normal income before they become farmable under the policy.

TIE's policy by and large is designed to only affect those with poor techs i.e. the sort of players who opt for high amounts of lower-tech military units... who just happen to be the above "disproportionately low amounts of income units vs. army size" & "disproportionately high defences vs. income" players generally i.e. the one's who under the old policy received disproportionately high levels of protection.

Incase anyone missed it - a poor-activity 3million army size player who due to that poor activity is so small, with 20% in military will loose 600k UU if massed - about 2 weeks of raiding.

A 6million army size player i.e. larger because he's more active - will loose about 1.2million of his army size if massed if he has 20% in military - about 4 weeks of raiding. Factor in the extra costs of arming & training the units, while at the same time NOT having twice the income (due to AE)... then that player could never recover as easily as the 3million army size player. So for that 6million army size player - adopting the tactic of having high levels of military units vs. army size is not a option.

Thus he's much more vulnerable to being farmed under the old TIE-TOC policy agreement. Its simply completely wrong that more active players are farmable even when using worker motivation to alter income, while less active players get to sit with normal income for far longer periods.

TIE's policy is far from perfect - which is why we ve invited Kenzu & everyone else to put forward a suggestion/solution. Your also right - it doesn't treat TOC fairly at all - it discriminates against those TOC players with poor technologies (TOC player's with "adequate" technologies get treated exactly like TIE btw).

Then again.... lets not forget that the old TIE-TOC policy basically discriminated against TIE due to our much larger army sizes - which made doing what WR does (high % of army size in military) impossible.. and which consequently, has always allowed reasonable amounts of farming of TIE to take place, while at the same time - large chunks of TOC are effectively unfarmable.

Kenzu keeps insisting on having this discriminatory policy remain in effect. Thats not gonna happen - and TIE's response is our OWN policy, which we are prepared to enforce - even if it results in war with WR/TOC.

So... again, Kenzu/WR is welcome to put forward a reasonable suggestion. So far its only Lord Ishurue who seems to be trying to find a solution... while all Kenzu keeps doing is threatening to mass TIE members who break WR's discriminatory policy.

Ian no matter how you look at it are this soo fra fetch and wrong:

Farming Done by Imperium Members = Need only make 250million profit.

I find it wrong and no matter how you try justisfy it by saying it depends on following stupid reason with TECHS.

Here is a fact.

You should say farming = armysize *150

No rules for 0 def accounts.

See that is fair this other thing is bullocks.

Nimras wrote:

seaborgium wrote:

Nimras wrote:Heck trading with resources between games aren't either it can be compared to trading for $$ betwen 2 players thats not unfair either its pure trade.

It has been the rules that you can't keep selling

Lol I want to be able to sell and trade as i see fit.

Then you need to find a game admin that allow it.
Sorry if this break a rule
http://www.thecoldwars.net
Is a game that the admin blocks all $$ transactions.
If you sell the account, the buyer can't play it bc the admin will block it.

Spoiler:

While I agree, with you Nimras. I also know why TIE is having such issues. I won't/can't get into them. But its the core of how TIE works and how it is they are so much better in different aspects then other groups.
Which is also why I do things different lol

Nimras wrote:

seaborgium wrote:

Nimras wrote:Heck trading with resources between games aren't either it can be compared to trading for $$ betwen 2 players thats not unfair either its pure trade.

It has been the rules that you can't keep selling

Lol I want to be able to sell and trade as i see fit.

ian wrote:

Nimras wrote:

ian wrote:Incase anyone wants a summarized version:

Untrained Unit Rate = 175,000

When Farming Imperium Members: Profit Requirement is army size x 150

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

Farming Done by Imperium Members = Need only make 250million profit.

Exception to Farming Done by The Imperium:

If you have a satisfactory Tech level. Satisfactory = 11% average techs for every 1billion defence power. I.e.
player with 4billion defence power = needs a average of 144% techs.

Anyone with techs above 175% will fall under the army size x 150 profit rule regardless of defence power (i.e. 8billion defence will only need 175% average techs).

Average techs = 4 techs added together/ 4 i.e. attack, covert, defence, assassins

If a player satisfies this... then the profit requirement is army size x 150.

This doesn't include personal bonus points by the way incase anyone is wondering

I will have to say IAN the part marked in red and bold is bullocks.

I find that wrong your farmin policy are not treating everyone equal and you defend with TIE is better than ToC not in this area.

Muj is not willing to pay back easely and like to argue over petty things that is clear is a breach. But this hmm.

Actually Lord Ishurue has said he doesn't see a problem with TIE's policy. TIE itself has asked for suggestions from Kenzu & other's on alternatives to achieve the desired effect. The desired effect simply being:

- To have a farming policy which offers ALL players additional protection - on top of the ordinary game mechanics - to allow them to go maybe 9 or 10hours on normal income without fear of being farmed *provided* they have a adequate defence to match their income.

The army size x 150 policy achieves that.... but also due to some player's having disproportionately low amount of income units vs. their actual army size, and disproportionately high defences vs. their income - then the "extra" protection offerred by the policy essentially makes it so players like that can go anything between 11 and 14hours normally without logging in and on normal income before they become farmable under the policy.

TIE's policy by and large is designed to only affect those with poor techs i.e. the sort of players who opt for high amounts of lower-tech military units... who just happen to be the above "disproportionately low amounts of income units vs. army size" & "disproportionately high defences vs. income" players generally i.e. the one's who under the old policy received disproportionately high levels of protection.

Incase anyone missed it - a poor-activity 3million army size player who due to that poor activity is so small, with 20% in military will loose 600k UU if massed - about 2 weeks of raiding.

A 6million army size player i.e. larger because he's more active - will loose about 1.2million of his army size if massed if he has 20% in military - about 4 weeks of raiding. Factor in the extra costs of arming & training the units, while at the same time NOT having twice the income (due to AE)... then that player could never recover as easily as the 3million army size player. So for that 6million army size player - adopting the tactic of having high levels of military units vs. army size is not a option.

Thus he's much more vulnerable to being farmed under the old TIE-TOC policy agreement. Its simply completely wrong that more active players are farmable even when using worker motivation to alter income, while less active players get to sit with normal income for far longer periods.

TIE's policy is far from perfect - which is why we ve invited Kenzu & everyone else to put forward a suggestion/solution. Your also right - it doesn't treat TOC fairly at all - it discriminates against those TOC players with poor technologies (TOC player's with "adequate" technologies get treated exactly like TIE btw).

Then again.... lets not forget that the old TIE-TOC policy basically discriminated against TIE due to our much larger army sizes - which made doing what WR does (high % of army size in military) impossible.. and which consequently, has always allowed reasonable amounts of farming of TIE to take place, while at the same time - large chunks of TOC are effectively unfarmable.

Kenzu keeps insisting on having this discriminatory policy remain in effect. Thats not gonna happen - and TIE's response is our OWN policy, which we are prepared to enforce - even if it results in war with WR/TOC.

So... again, Kenzu/WR is welcome to put forward a reasonable suggestion. So far its only Lord Ishurue who seems to be trying to find a solution... while all Kenzu keeps doing is threatening to mass TIE members who break WR's discriminatory policy.

Ian no matter how you look at it are this soo fra fetch and wrong:

Farming Done by Imperium Members = Need only make 250million profit.

I find it wrong and no matter how you try justisfy it by saying it depends on following stupid reason with TECHS.

Here is a fact.

You should say farming = armysize *150

No rules for 0 def accounts.

See that is fair this other thing is bullocks.

Who decides it has to be army size x 150?

I ve asked WR again and again to propose a solution - I even proposed something based on income units x 150 x some additional factor (i.e. weapons level or something) to apply to TIE & TOC - and what happens? Its ignored and Kenzu insists on following a policy which DOES actively discriminate against TIE;s way of doing things.

TIE's insisting on following this tech policy = unfair on some of TOC
WR's insisting on following their policy = unfair on TIE.

Neither policy is better or worse than the other (both are bad)... hence the need to find a satisfactory one. But the ONLY way that will happen is some active involvement from World Republic to actually recognize the negative affects the existing TOC policy has regarding TIE's vulnerability to being farmed, and our inability to mainly farm back.

What exactly would you have TIE do? Go back to TOC's old policy which WR have refused to even consider changing - knowing how it treats active TIE members? We ARE actively asking again and again for WR to come forward with a reasonable suggestion. We can't do anything more than that....

To simply go back to the old TIE-TOC policy would only result in the injustice of the situation being one way - resulting in TIE getting farmed just like we still do, but struggling to farm back. At least this way both parties are at least equal in one aspect - injustices being done to both sides....

TOC's old policy which had the affect of making their less active players unfarmable will not be tolerated. As for TIE's tech policy... we have no long-term expectations of keeping it... which is why we are asking for TOC involvement in making a new fairer one. It is a interim policy until a new satisfactory one can be created - but everyday in which WR stalls... is a day longer in which the interim policy remains in affect....

ian wrote:

Nimras wrote:

seaborgium wrote:

Nimras wrote:Heck trading with resources between games aren't either it can be compared to trading for $$ betwen 2 players thats not unfair either its pure trade.

It has been the rules that you can't keep selling

Lol I want to be able to sell and trade as i see fit.

ian wrote:

Nimras wrote:

ian wrote:Incase anyone wants a summarized version:

Untrained Unit Rate = 175,000

When Farming Imperium Members: Profit Requirement is army size x 150

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

Farming Done by Imperium Members = Need only make 250million profit.

Exception to Farming Done by The Imperium:

If you have a satisfactory Tech level. Satisfactory = 11% average techs for every 1billion defence power. I.e.
player with 4billion defence power = needs a average of 144% techs.

Anyone with techs above 175% will fall under the army size x 150 profit rule regardless of defence power (i.e. 8billion defence will only need 175% average techs).

Average techs = 4 techs added together/ 4 i.e. attack, covert, defence, assassins

If a player satisfies this... then the profit requirement is army size x 150.

This doesn't include personal bonus points by the way incase anyone is wondering

I will have to say IAN the part marked in red and bold is bullocks.

I find that wrong your farmin policy are not treating everyone equal and you defend with TIE is better than ToC not in this area.

Muj is not willing to pay back easely and like to argue over petty things that is clear is a breach. But this hmm.

Actually Lord Ishurue has said he doesn't see a problem with TIE's policy. TIE itself has asked for suggestions from Kenzu & other's on alternatives to achieve the desired effect. The desired effect simply being:

- To have a farming policy which offers ALL players additional protection - on top of the ordinary game mechanics - to allow them to go maybe 9 or 10hours on normal income without fear of being farmed *provided* they have a adequate defence to match their income.

The army size x 150 policy achieves that.... but also due to some player's having disproportionately low amount of income units vs. their actual army size, and disproportionately high defences vs. their income - then the "extra" protection offerred by the policy essentially makes it so players like that can go anything between 11 and 14hours normally without logging in and on normal income before they become farmable under the policy.

TIE's policy by and large is designed to only affect those with poor techs i.e. the sort of players who opt for high amounts of lower-tech military units... who just happen to be the above "disproportionately low amounts of income units vs. army size" & "disproportionately high defences vs. income" players generally i.e. the one's who under the old policy received disproportionately high levels of protection.

Incase anyone missed it - a poor-activity 3million army size player who due to that poor activity is so small, with 20% in military will loose 600k UU if massed - about 2 weeks of raiding.

A 6million army size player i.e. larger because he's more active - will loose about 1.2million of his army size if massed if he has 20% in military - about 4 weeks of raiding. Factor in the extra costs of arming & training the units, while at the same time NOT having twice the income (due to AE)... then that player could never recover as easily as the 3million army size player. So for that 6million army size player - adopting the tactic of having high levels of military units vs. army size is not a option.

Thus he's much more vulnerable to being farmed under the old TIE-TOC policy agreement. Its simply completely wrong that more active players are farmable even when using worker motivation to alter income, while less active players get to sit with normal income for far longer periods.

TIE's policy is far from perfect - which is why we ve invited Kenzu & everyone else to put forward a suggestion/solution. Your also right - it doesn't treat TOC fairly at all - it discriminates against those TOC players with poor technologies (TOC player's with "adequate" technologies get treated exactly like TIE btw).

Then again.... lets not forget that the old TIE-TOC policy basically discriminated against TIE due to our much larger army sizes - which made doing what WR does (high % of army size in military) impossible.. and which consequently, has always allowed reasonable amounts of farming of TIE to take place, while at the same time - large chunks of TOC are effectively unfarmable.

Kenzu keeps insisting on having this discriminatory policy remain in effect. Thats not gonna happen - and TIE's response is our OWN policy, which we are prepared to enforce - even if it results in war with WR/TOC.

So... again, Kenzu/WR is welcome to put forward a reasonable suggestion. So far its only Lord Ishurue who seems to be trying to find a solution... while all Kenzu keeps doing is threatening to mass TIE members who break WR's discriminatory policy.

Ian no matter how you look at it are this soo fra fetch and wrong:

Farming Done by Imperium Members = Need only make 250million profit.

I find it wrong and no matter how you try justisfy it by saying it depends on following stupid reason with TECHS.

Here is a fact.

You should say farming = armysize *150

No rules for 0 def accounts.

See that is fair this other thing is bullocks.

Who decides it has to be army size x 150?

I ve asked WR again and again to propose a solution - I even proposed something based on income units x 150 x some additional factor (i.e. weapons level or something) to apply to TIE & TOC - and what happens? Its ignored and Kenzu insists on following a policy which DOES actively discriminate against TIE;s way of doing things.

TIE's insisting on following this tech policy = unfair on some of TOC
WR's insisting on following their policy = unfair on TIE.

Neither policy is better or worse than the other (both are bad)... hence the need to find a satisfactory one. But the ONLY way that will happen is some active involvement from World Republic to actually recognize the negative affects the existing TOC policy has regarding TIE's vulnerability to being farmed, and our inability to mainly farm back.

What exactly would you have TIE do? Go back to TOC's old policy which WR have refused to even consider changing - knowing how it treats active TIE members? We ARE actively asking again and again for WR to come forward with a reasonable suggestion. We can't do anything more than that....

To simply go back to the old TIE-TOC policy would only result in the injustice of the situation being one way - resulting in TIE getting farmed just like we still do, but struggling to farm back. At least this way both parties are at least equal in one aspect - injustices being done to both sides....

TOC's old policy which had the affect of making their less active players unfarmable will not be tolerated. As for TIE's tech policy... we have no long-term expectations of keeping it... which is why we are asking for TOC involvement in making a new fairer one. It is a interim policy until a new satisfactory one can be created - but everyday in which WR stalls... is a day longer in which the interim policy remains in affect....

M8 no matter how you look at it saying all TIE members can farm anyone for 250mill profit unless their TECH is at ceatain % is in my eyes bullocks.

The 150 * army is a unwritten rule that was made just like in GW the unwriten rule is 10 def can hold 1 naq meaning if you have 400bill def you can hold 40bill naq anymore and you get farmed.

As far i am concerned you should remove that TIE can farm for 250 mill profit and make it that what people can farm TIE for the same can TIE farm others for just like TM.

If a war starts because of TIE farming rule or Muj bullocks farming rule i would gladly help take both down.

Thats only because i have read those 2 not WR i will. But if you read TM's ours is easy.

What we set of demand for people to uphold to farm us we farm others by. If we breake our own farming policy we honour our policy and pay back emidiatly and do not debate as a few ceatain Muj doese over nothing they where not in the clear by our policy that simple.

I find a farmin policy that says this is how we want to be farmed and we farm others by same standard thats a fair and honest alliance and someone who fights the prober fight.

Another reason why i stay in TM.

No bullocks % which is impossible to fit in and is way to hard for many to understand a simple easy and clean policy fair to all as it is 100% both ways.

seaborgium wrote:

Nimras wrote:

seaborgium wrote:

Nimras wrote:Heck trading with resources between games aren't either it can be compared to trading for $$ betwen 2 players thats not unfair either its pure trade.

It has been the rules that you can't keep selling

Lol I want to be able to sell and trade as i see fit.

Then you need to find a game admin that allow it.
Sorry if this break a rule
http://www.thecoldwars.net
Is a game that the admin blocks all $$ transactions.
If you sell the account, the buyer can't play it bc the admin will block it.

Spoiler:

While I agree, with you Nimras. I also know why TIE is having such issues. I won't/can't get into them. But its the core of how TIE works and how it is they are so much better in different aspects then other groups.
Which is also why I do things different lol

Well About the trading Sea. If admin here blocks for $$ and cross server i at least will respect it.

But if he allows 1 then he also allows the other no question asked.

And as long he allows both I want to be able to work on my account as i see fit.

Heck if he bands both i still would want to be able to do with my account as i see fit not all this bullshit about trading policies thats bullocks and only a way to be able to ban players he don't like and nothing but that.

He does allow it, as long as the parties stay with the ratios. He hasn't stopped it, just slowed it down.

TBH the only $$ should be with him. However his BM rates are all over the place, I watched a large drop over a span of 3-4 days. Thats why I haven't bought any from him.

seaborgium wrote:He does allow it, as long as the parties stay with the ratios. He hasn't stopped it, just slowed it down.

TBH the only $$ should be with him. However his BM rates are all over the place, I watched a large drop over a span of 3-4 days. Thats why I haven't bought any from him.

Hehe well i find it wrong he triese to stop your trading if you have alot to trade with or willing to spend $$ to buy from a player then by all means the player should be allowed.

Its not Feeding i have something against feeders and cheaters.

But people leaving the game or selling by trading via cross server or even $$ be my guest do it i see nothing wrong in a friend because they leave give their stuff to one or you help out a friend to grow fast or plain trade it should be allowed as much the person want. Not contained. If they wanna waste their money or resources let them.