Vacation Mode Needs ReVamp

[DeletedUser7629]

Got a major issue here and I want to know why it works this way.

To my understanding, once you click the VM, 48hrs later it actually kicks in. During those 48hrs, you can still be attacked, but you can not attack anyone. Any CS launched to you BEFORE you pressed the button is still active and will play though, but any CS launched AFTER you pressed the button would not go through, or be active.

Well, I am wrong about the second half--- Cause one of our main guys had to press the VM button and take off immediately BUT chimed in to say there were no attacks inbound, therefore no CS's inbound, therefore ultimately he should be safe. 47hrs before VM officially kicks in, but no CS's or attacks inbound.

Enemy caught wind of it (via spy I guess) and easily 16hrs+ AFTER our guy pressed his VM button, these guys have launched over 10 CS's to over 10 different cities of his. The outcome ? ALL them cities are under siege and lost. How ? And Why ?

Let me explain and I got 2 questions about VM and why in the WORLD does it work this way ?

#1 - Why can't you also attack (not CS, but normal attack) cities when you are under the 48hr ticker ? (though they can attack you). Developers usually have a good reasoning behind their rules, I want to hear this one, as to me there is no good reason that I can think of. No abuse that could be done, etc.. so what is the reason ? Can this change to something more fair ?

#2 - If you've already pressed the VM button, and are in the 48hr wait period. Why in the world can someone still CS you IF they are launching CS after you pressed your button ? Cause you obviously are not running away from a CS, cause there was none before you pressed button. So no abuse would/could/is happening there.

This doesn't make sense, cause suppose you pressed your VM button. Then in the last 2hrs at the 46th hour, someone launches a CS at you with a 1hr 59min TT, you are still there, you try to defend, they land the CS lets say 30sec before your VM actually kicks in. You are now UNDER SIEGE and can not do anything about it cause you are now in VM and locked out of the game. Also, your teammates can't do anything to help break the siege either for the same reason.

See where I am going with this ? I would like the reasoning behind why it is the way it is, as it seems horribly damaging and just plain wrong/bad reasoning. Unless I can't see the good reasoning, in which case, please explain.

Thanks..

 

[DeletedUser8562]

i dont think thats how it works (although i havent played a conquest world in more than a year)

 

[DeletedUser7629]

i dont think thats how it works (although i havent played a conquest world in more than a year)

I didn't think that was how it worked either. I had it explained differently to me from a experience player. Boy were we ALL wrong.

So far I have this experience. Member went into VM, for them 48hrs before it kicked in, ALL THE WAY DOWN TO THE LAST SECOND enemies were able to land a CS in his cities and put it under siege. One city finally turned enemy almost 11hrs after his VM was indeed kicked in. So 60hrs after he pressed the button !

BUT during that whole time, he is not allowed to attack anyone. lol - *** kind of programming reasoning is that ?

He had a city (several actually) under siege while his VM actually kicked in. When we tried to attack the siege to finish breaking it, it said we could not attack or support player because he was in VM !! Sure enough, many hours later, the flags turned red. Come on !! Revamp VM immediately, this is ridiculous. There is not one good reason why it should be like that.

 

[DeletedUser]

Theres several reasons why its like this.

Many players use vacation mode to avoid fighting and save their cities. This is why it takes 48 hours to activate. During this time you can still be attacked and it even states that on the vacation mode page.

You can not attack once its been activated because some players would activate VM, attack players and then be safe from retaliation.

Vacation mode is the way it is for a reason. Your member lost his cities because he could not defend himself and it sounds like your alliance could not defend him either. You can still support yourself and have allies support you during the 48 hours prior to it activating. That means he should have let you guys know that he had 11 incoming CS.

You have to activate VM prior to leaving the game. If you know you will be gone for a weekend then activate it Wednesday so you can still protect your cities until Friday. This "experienced" player that told you how it worked was obviously wrong and you should not listen to everyone about how the game works. This comes directly from the vacation mode tab in the settings and is very descriptive.

 

[DeletedUser6919]

Guessing that was me. Sorry I didn't word it very well so you misunderstood what I meant.

When I said 'When activating vac mode, it takes 48 hours before it will kick in and during that time you can not attack. Reason for that is because CS max TT is 48 hours, so it means that someone can not turn it on to prevent losing a city that has a CS on way to it. '

I what I meant was CS max TT and the cool down period are the same limit(both 48 hours), so if there is already a CS on the way to a city, there is no way that anyone can turn on vac mode and have it kick in before CS is due to land.

As Emilio said the reason for this is to prevent players from abusing vac mode so if they spot a CS incoming, they can not just instantly go into vacation mode and save their city by just pressing the button.

Any attacks can be launched on the player during this time providing they arrive before vacation mode kicks in. Which I should have explained more clearly. Sorry

I'm not sure why you can't attack after you activate vac mode. It will be some other form of anti-abuse thing but I personally don't like that rule. I think at the very least, we should be able to attack our own cities.

 

[DeletedUser]

Theres several reasons why its like this.

Many players use vacation mode to avoid fighting and save their cities. This is why it takes 48 hours to activate. During this time you can still be attacked and it even states that on the vacation mode page.

You can not attack once its been activated because some players would activate VM, attack players and then be safe from retaliation.

Vacation mode is the way it is for a reason. Your member lost his cities because he could not defend himself and it sounds like your alliance could not defend him either. You can still support yourself and have allies support you during the 48 hours prior to it activating. That means he should have let you guys know that he had 11 incoming CS.

You have to activate VM prior to leaving the game. If you know you will be gone for a weekend then activate it Wednesday so you can still protect your cities until Friday. This "experienced" player that told you how it worked was obviously wrong and you should not listen to everyone about how the game works. This comes directly from the vacation mode tab in the settings and is very descriptive.

The unfair part is that the enemies' sieges were protected by the player's vacation mode. Surely you should (or at least your alliance should) be able to break sieges on a player in vacation mode? A landed CS in this situation could have 1 of any unit left to defend it, and it would become the sieging player's city, because no one can attack it.

 

[DeletedUser7629]

Emilio, please read Conquer Of Kingdoms post, and that is EXACTLY what I am talking about. I guess my rant was too long, lol, and I confused most.. I am just saying, it needs to be revamped in a way where the VM kicking in finally doesn't protect the enemy from attacks to break siege. This is a HUGE over look.

All this protection from so called "abuse", but no protection from that ? The rules should stay the same with ONE clause. If your CS does not land in enough time to be DONE with the siege before VM kicks in, then it either can't be launched, or it bounces.., doesn't work, etc..

Theoretically the real abuse would be to land a CS 10 seconds before some ones VM kicks in. Then the VM protects the WHOLE length of the siege. See ??? Why is that fair ? Where does that make any sense ?

And no, my team could protect everything and everyone just fine, spies and VM abuse were the issue. Long story. Believe me, the team I am with is strong and good.

No attacking during the 48hr period due to "retaliation abuse" is.... eh... idk, I still don't see where the abuse can lie if they can still attack the person going into VM. Theres the retaliation right there. There is no growing while on VM, so retaliate on them when they return, it will be the same thing. Also, imo, retaliation attacks are overrated. So like I said.... eh...

I understand everything else, and thought I explained that, and its reasonings, I understand. Them 2 things I do not agree with. Makes no sense.

 

[DeletedUser]

Now I understand what your saying. It does seem unfair to not be able to break the sieges once his VM activates. I'm not sure how you would change the rule because that would allow the player to be attacked at certain cities while his other cities are protected. I guess if the players land a CS 10 seconds before activation.. the only way to stop it is with defense. It does seem a little unfair but at the same time seems like a hard problem to solve. I'm not a fan of VM anyway. Theres no benefit of going into it and its really annoying when enemies go into it to avoid being taken over.

Good luck to you

 

[DeletedUser7629]

Ok guys, I got it. PLEASE MODS CONSIDER THIS:

Right now, this is how it is:

1 - Once you enter VM you can't attack, but unfortunately can be attacked. This is understandable because of possible abuse of VM. BUT the issue it causes is you can't Snipe CS's offensively in your own cities, which you NEED to be able to do if this is going to be fair.

2 - Your own members can not attack you either once VM kicks in. This too is understandable, just because it obviously is. BUT the issue it causes is (talk about abuse), enemies exploit this and plan to land CS's a few minutes/seconds before your VM kicks in, in turn having VM itself protect their siege to invincibility due to the fact no one can attack you.

Ok, so how do we solve these problems while STILL keeping the original rules in tact ? Simple:

VM works exactly as it does now, no problem. Just encode two simple rules to that already existing code.

1: Make it so the person entering VM can attack only himself. (I see no possible abuse there and it solves the issue).

2: Make it so any siege that partook on VM player during the 48hr prior (down to last second) is still attackable/supportable by anyone till siege is either broken or over. This would work on a per city basis. Just simply any city under siege is attackable/supportable for the entire duration of siege, but thats it. If siege is broke, then if players VM has kicked in, city is no longer attackable/supportable as it is in VM. But if siege wasn't broke, then it obvious becomes the new persons.

Any city that hadn't gotten under siege remains as normal and in VM once VM actually kicks in. So in a sense a siege will cause that particular city of the VM player to "lift attack/support limitation" on it and it only till the siege is over or broke.

This seems the most fair to me. It doesn't change any of the original reasons of the limitations. But yet it fixes the unfairness of the certain exploits that it currently causes. At same time is a easy code to implement.

What do you all think ? Please, we need to vote on this asap and hopefully change it, cause it is a pretty detrimental issue if you are playing a enemy that exploits this.

 

[DeletedUser5423]

Yes, yes, and yes. These changes should help to prevent abuse of VM much better than the current rules do. I would love to see these changes enacted.

 

[DeletedUser]

i dont see the big deal, everyone should know the rules. Also why on a conquest world its vital to make sure no cs can land in that final 30 minutes. far too many people use vm to run away from attacks.

 

[DeletedUser7629]

i dont see the big deal, everyone should know the rules. Also why on a conquest world its vital to make sure no cs can land in that final 30 minutes. far too many people use vm to run away from attacks.

Please reread everything again carefully. You will understand. Unless you like not being able to break a siege someone has on your city and think thats fair. Or even worse, not being able to prevent the siege in the first place because you can't attack yourself to snipe the CS.

We know the rules, yes, we are saying the rules need to be adjusted to some equal ground of fairness.

And hey, I am not crying about this, as I never have went into VM, and never plan to. And I have exploited this unfairness to my advantage, so I can speak from experience. Its not right.

 

[DeletedUser8562]

Please reread everything again carefully. You will understand. Unless you like not being able to break a siege someone has on your city and think thats fair. Or even worse, not being able to prevent the siege in the first place because you can't attack yourself to snipe the CS.

We know the rules, yes, we are saying the rules need to be adjusted to some equal ground of fairness.

And hey, I am not crying about this, as I never have went into VM, and never plan to. And I have exploited this unfairness to my advantage, so I can speak from experience. Its not right.

infa red is right. i have seen cities lost because a player just relies on backsniping, having no wall and minimal def. when trying to go on vacation they can lose a city or two or three or even MANY cities

and mlfip? i suggest you read the top post once more. there are some good points mentioned

 

[DeletedUser10119]

i dont see the big deal, everyone should know the rules. Also why on a conquest world its vital to make sure no cs can land in that final 30 minutes. far too many people use vm to run away from attacks.

I have only seen a player running away from attacks once, and it didn't work
I vote for these changes

 

[DeletedUser7629]

I have only seen a player running away from attacks once, and it didn't work
I vote for these changes

Thanks !

Also, keep in mind, the changes I propose do not allow the person going into VM to "run away" any more than they can now. Nothing would change there.

It would simply allow the person going into VM to offensively snipe CS's on his cities till his VM was fully kicked in. And allow for him and anyone to still attack or support a current siege in progress (of the VM players cities only) of the siege's entire duration if one landed in a time that would have any of the siege duration bleed into that player's VM time.

 

[DeletedUser10491]

I vote for these changes

I agree with Cwill477 - the rules should be changed.

It's not fair for a player to not be able to counter-attack (snipe their own cities), yet they can still be attacked/CS'ed. Nor for an alliance not to be given the opportunity to try and break a siege that is protected by VM (especially when the CS was launched after the player pressed the VM button)

 

[DeletedUser10492]

I agree with Cwill477 - the rules should be changed.

It's not fair for a player to not be able to counter-attack (snipe their own cities), yet they can still be attacked/CS'ed. Nor for an alliance not to be given the opportunity to try and break a siege that is protected by VM (especially when the CS was launched after the player pressed the VM button)

Yes, please change this. Allowing an attacker to hide behind VM is very unfair.

 

[DeletedUser]

Yes, please change this. Allowing an attacker to hide behind VM is very unfair.

I also vote for changing the rules. I played revolt world before and its not a problem there but in conquest world it just does not seem fair, in fact its very unfair

 

[DeletedUser257]

He had a city (several actually) under siege while his VM actually kicked in. When we tried to attack the siege to finish breaking it, it said we could not attack or support player because he was in VM !! Sure enough, many hours later, the flags turned red. Come on !! Revamp VM immediately, this is ridiculous. There is not one good reason why it should be like that.

This part has to be changed. I don't mind getting attacked during the 48 hour timeframe as you can defend yourself (even wth backsniping you can send the backsnipe as support not attack and just cancel after the cs lands) but people having the ability to besiege cities while someone is on vm is completely ridiculous.

Edit: Saw the possible solutions. How about just nobody can send a CS that would land 24 hours before VM starts (compensating for speed 1 conquest worlds) so people have the full time to break the siege. During this 24 hour period, the player who activated VM can still be attacked/supported until the full 48 hour timer is up.

 

[DeletedUser7629]

This part has to be changed. I don't mind getting attacked during the 48 hour timeframe as you can defend yourself (even wth backsniping you can send the backsnipe as support not attack and just cancel after the cs lands) but people having the ability to besiege cities while someone is on vm is completely ridiculous.

Thanks for chiming in bobdude. Yes, I totally agree still getting attacked is ok and normal, definitely not opposing that.

But remember, if you have no native units in a city they are attacking, then attacking yourself from one of your own close by cities is another form of "Sniping" that I speak of that is robbed from us but not being able to attack ourselves during the 48hr period. All I suggest is to be able to attack myself while in the 48hr tick down to VM mode.

Edit: Saw the possible solutions. How about just nobody can send a CS that would land 24 hours before VM starts (compensating for speed 1 conquest worlds) so people have the full time to break the siege. During this 24 hour period, the player who activated VM can still be attacked/supported until the full 48 hour timer is up.

Yes, this would work as well. Thank you for a good suggestion. (12hrs for speed 2 worlds, etc..). So imo it is up to the mods/votes to decide which solution would be best.