STATEMENT ABOUT PUSHING / FEATURE ABUSE (aka cheating)

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

  • Not saying anything bad,but you really need to make checking out reports of multiplayer accounts number 1 in things to do.
    I reported a player who was using the same name in 10 countries with only 1-10 added to make it different.(Almost not cheating it was that blatant)the real players in the map banded together and removed him,he was defeated about a week ago.Today I got a message he has been banned.lol

    So well done for banning him,but 2 weeks ?+.

    Now to make this fair why not refund (in gold not cash)those who pay to play when someone has cheated(only on that world and only if they have fought the cheater)..So limited refund.

    I dont pay so this wont affect me,but for those who use gold it would be a huge boost and encouragement to keep playing.........Plus they will need that gold to take me down....muhhahah.

    So to recap.

    If a world has had a player who used multiplayer account to gain advantage,those paying to pay should get a refund for loss incurred.
    Those who dont use gold get nothing.
    This means using gold is a huge advantage,if fact a game changer if someone has cheated.
    If you dont pay (like me) then you better be good or your gone.

  • jadeknight666 wrote:

    Not saying anything bad,but you really need to make checking out reports of multiplayer accounts number 1 in things to do.
    I reported a player who was using the same name in 10 countries with only 1-10 added to make it different.(Almost not cheating it was that blatant)the real players in the map banded together and removed him,he was defeated about a week ago.Today I got a message he has been banned.lol

    So well done for banning him,but 2 weeks ?+.

    Now to make this fair why not refund (in gold not cash)those who pay to play when someone has cheated(only on that world and only if they have fought the cheater)..So limited refund.

    I dont pay so this wont affect me,but for those who use gold it would be a huge boost and encouragement to keep playing.........Plus they will need that gold to take me down....muhhahah.

    So to recap.

    If a world has had a player who used multiplayer account to gain advantage,those paying to pay should get a refund for loss incurred.
    Those who dont use gold get nothing.
    This means using gold is a huge advantage,if fact a game changer if someone has cheated.
    If you dont pay (like me) then you better be good or your gone.
    That's what happened to me in a game. A guy had 4 countries to my 1. I spent $130 in gold fighting him off. I made complaints and it took me saying in chat that I wouldn't spend any money on the game and getting banned 24 hours from chat for saying that to get any response. I think the game could be a great game, but with nothing in place to protect us from multi-players really kills it for me and no I won't spend no more of my money unless it got fixed with something like Punkbuster. I have no issue with 4 real players in an alliance trying to team up against me, but as long as they are 4 real, different people. But this wasn't the case in my game and someone in support actually admitted today this person should of be banned and wasn't. Screenshot_393.png

  • I think if you believe there are cheaters in your game, you should report it but giving out here on the forum -especially for something that has already been actioned or is under investigation-makes no difference other than frustrating the guys working on the solution. In every online game there will be some abusing the system and there are those trying to remove them. Let them do their jobs.

    Alliances are very important in the game, personally I would not limit the numbers, there are alliance members, friends playing the same games because they trust each other. I do not agree with removing the unit and resource trades and I hope this is only temporary until a better anti-cheating method is developed. I never understood why you would need to trade provinces, so don`t really miss that feature.

    I would also welcome something like a non-aggression pact, which will not give the other player intelligence of my military potential but ensure we don`t attack each other. In this case there also should be a 24hrs cool-down time meaning if any of the parties cancel the non-aggression treaty, they still cannot attack the other within the next 24 hrs. This would be a reliable pact to safeguard the flanks

  • For the newbs like me, what? What is the significance of one player having all the rare material? How does one player having all the rare material affect anything positively or negatively? Why does rare material get mentioned so much anyway, it seems to be just another resource.

    Why have we been throttled to nothing now? Can't trade. All resources have been slashed to near nothing. I'm just trying to win this one map before I leap into other games. Now I'm at a crawl. I have like 50 cities without about 400 Arms factories and I'm producing 22 fuel/hour. With no ability to trade I can basically make like 1 tank or infantry per day, period. This game will never end at this pace.

  • Rare material are the "god-resource" because they enable (and are usually the limiting factor for) Research and technological development.

    So, some people have been cheating to trade Rare Material producing cities to themselves, or to buy Rares at below-Global-Market cost in lopsided and unfair PvP Trades.

    This is a bad problem, and we are very glad that Staff is trying various ways to fix it!


    Take Care!

  • ShawnMorton wrote:

    That's what happened to me in a game. A guy had 4 countries to my 1. I spent $130 in gold fighting him off. I made complaints and it took me saying in chat that I wouldn't spend any money on the game and getting banned 24 hours from chat for saying that to get any response.
    Nice, we need more player like you and like your opponents. Really sweet.

  • No, I feel really dumb to tell you the truth. Heck I can't even get into the game I spent money on lol. The last update really has killed it for me. And it's been 5 days since someone in support responded saying once the original problem has been resolved , they would get back to me? I'm still here and I resolved the problem myself by killing the cheater at my expense and still feeling ripped off. Sorry if my feelings upset any of the big wigs, but the players feeling are important, Without the players , what do you have??

    The post was edited 2 times, last by ShawnMorton ().

  • Germanico wrote:

    the new coalition feature - replacing pacts in the game, will have a backstabbing aka nonaggression timer.

    //G
    I like the idea of a non aggression timer, but i still think there should be a moral hit from breaking alliances too. Fine, they break it they can't attack me for 12 hours, or 24 whatever the number is, but with the speed of movement most of my units will still be in places that they were, and i won't have produced a lot of new ones. If someone decides to break an alliance they should have a -50% morale hit for a week so they aren't producing resources near as well, and their recent annexations all go into revolt. I don't just want backstabbing curtailed, I want it punished to the point that doing so is in-game suicide.
    ----------------------

    Jacopo: Why not just kill them? I'll do it! I'll run up to Paris - bam, bam, bam, bam. I'm back before week's end. We spend the treasure. How is this a bad plan?

    Remember that no one ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb idiot die for his country.