First of all, I love this idea, not really going to stop feeding but would be a great addition to strengthen alliances.
5forV wrote:Yet another suggestion re team play.
Alliance banks, leaders set an automatic rate of naq collection, this goes to an alliance bank.
Alliance banks can be used on four various techs. Techs which are unique to alliances and not available to a player by themselves. Whilst in the alliance they receive the benefit, if they leave or get booted they lose the benefit, join back up and they receive it.
Commanders/Officers share a " Corps Secret Temple/bank" consisting of a total combined capacity of all commander officer members +10% synergy effect - if you have a commander, than you're an officer, officers cannot be a commander.
Players can only take out what you've put in (to stop feeding), just means some players can still get large upgrades if they farm for themselves and play strategically.
Apogryph wrote:My suggestions are not a way of eliminating feeding. That is impossible.
You yourself have had some excellent ideas on ways to either stop or seriously limit the potential for feeding on the scale that it is currently plaguing Q, what we should be seeing in this thread is every suggestion that has possible merit dragged back into the lime light to be discussed and fine tuned in a manner fitting.
Surely there is a way to stop feeding, I agree with everyone that has been suggesting the banning of feeders or at least a reset - possible ban after serial offences - but there are so many possible limitations that we can suggest admin impose to make things "fairer" - and I know that there are those of you that say "feeding is a tactic" well I wouldn't rate "Multi's" that far from feeding... I mean, I have played other MMO's in the past that didn't have any Multi policing in place and had 20 accounts.. basically running my own alliance and kicking arse at it... how is having others feeding you to having control of numerous accounts yourself.
Right, Suggestion time.
I also had some ideas a few era's back - I will endeavor to either remember them or find the on the forum - but my most recent thought, not too dissimilar to other's suggestions, is to impose a "Naq Gained Limit" based on the feeders INCOME (this in turn takes into account their UP (you can't have a large income with no miners, and there's no miners with out UP) there for feeders will have to have a decent income to be able to be farmed for large amounts, this it turn, if the feeders decide to work their accounts to a stage where the "Feedee" or Eater, as some like to call them, can actually hit them for large amounts the feeder account would have had to spend so much time working their own account to get it within range that it won't be profitable to either parties.
Something like this, say I have an income of 75mil per turn (which I currently do) what if there was a limit, say 100x my income, that would mean the MOST anyone could hit me for in one hit is 7.5bil... what would you say would be the average income of a feeder account.... a quarter of that (maybe not currently but as you would expect my, or an active players income will increase exponentially whilst were plowing ahead with our UP) even say it was half of my income (37.5 - we'll call it 35mil/turn for the point of this exercise) that only a net gain of 3.5bil PER HIT... and lets face it, what inactive account would possibly have that much NAQ out in one neatly presented parcel ready to by devoured unless there is feeding involved.
Sure with that suggestion it does mean that "legit" accounts can't farm each other for Huge amounts but i mean who is stupid enough to loose the NAQ they take out of the bank for upgrades/UP etc... i know it does happen but it would just mean that if you see someone with say 50bil out and that individuals personal income is 100mil you would have to hit them 5 times to get the whole 50bil off the dumb A$$...
see how this would limit the feeding from small accounts that's sole purpose are to feed... they would have to play, and if you get ppl actually using their own account they might realize that "hey, maybe if i didn't send all my hard owned profits away i could actually compete" - and the sooner that happens the better, we'll have less feeders and more ppl interested in actually PLAYING the game and competing for rank, glory and FUN!!
Possibly something link this either combined with an Army Size limit on total Naq gained would certainly put the preveriable spanner in the works.
Please add how this could be fine tuned, changed or add your own additional or alternative ideas… that’s what this thread should be about!!
Elliot
______________
Edit: Limiting Naq hits based on income would also serve to expose the small accounts that are being hit multiple times for the same "Maximum" amount time after time, and these accounts SHOULD be banned… it the only thing that could work in conjunction with this for bigger accounts getting bigger amounts off similarly sized accounts is to have a equation that increases the Max hit if your army sizes are similar.
Eg.
Attacker: Army size of 200k
Defender: 150k army size with an income of 100mil/turn
Naq gained with only income limiter = 10bil
If you were to add a multiplier of something like, defenders army size over attackers army size, times, say four, equals Naq gained.
Equation: ((Defenders Army Size / Attackers Army Size) * 4) * (Defenders income * 100)
((150/200)*4)*(100*100) = 30bil Naq Gained…
Would mean that if for instance the feeder accounts only had 50k army size and an income of 50mil/turn and the attacker has 200k that they are only getting the same 5 bil that they would be because of the army size difference…. Substitute the numbers for differences in army size and also have a look at just the income “restriction” by itself, I think that equation will work to keep hits between bigger accounts “higher” and still limit the Naq hits from feeder accounts..
Thoughts??