Do Not Suggest Complaint and suggestion- GB disconnecting should be not allowed!

[DeletedUser5882]

I just had the nastiest GB disconnecting incident!

A player had his Arc reach 69 and I checked his GB. All levels (p1/2) was sniped with regular 50% placement. Definitely nothing 1.9 or so. I thought now it is 70 so not many would want to place fps since profit is much less so I decided to go for his p1. Normally I am cautious but this is a good thing for a player if they have no 1.9 support so did not mind and placed on my pc with normal speed.

Suddenly while 110 fps was remaining to complete, the GB got disconnected. Later He got someone to fill p1 deliberately causing me a huge loss over 1K fps! Any honor and decency should not be looked in people like these!!!!

However now the thing is, this is outright robbery!! There is no other explanation for something like this and FoE has no rules or protection against such robbery and despicable behavior!

Either make it possible to keep placing fps even if disconnected or add a feature to make it possible for GB owner to block the GB from placing any fps before!

And I would like to know if this is a support matter because as I said, this was deliberate and simply robbery since the GB owner had zero loss and te other player did even make profit ... over me !!!!

EDIT: NormaJeane - 2018-12-14 - removed player names.​

 

[ebs the drunk]

That existing lock is to open new levels (from level 11 up) with payment of full set of BPs, not lock to prevent complete current level FPs.

A lock to protect the "double dipping" by owner, to eliminate the revenge strategy of leveling up the GB by (for example) plundered victims, or to prevent leveling by "accident" has been asked before in other forums.

What? Did you stop reading when you hit the comma? Try reading the full comment.

 

[DeletedUser8859]

That is (hardly) discussion about locking unlocked levels, completely different topic.

My error, https://forum.beta.forgeofempires.com/index.php?threads/fps-on-others-gbs.9862/

 

[DeletedUser8859]

Wtf, did you stop reading when you hit the comma? Try reading the full comment.

I read it. You suggest to modify the current lock on new levels to work also to protect current level to be completed. I'm telling that

• Suggestions on that line have been made, discussed, and archived in the forums several times.
• No positive feedback, or any other sign that a change to provide that have been given by the developers.

 

[ebs the drunk]

I read it. You suggest to modify the current lock on new levels to work also to protect current level to be completed. I'm telling that

• Suggestions on that line have been made, discussed, and archived in the forums several times.
• No positive feedback, or any other sign that a change to provide that have been given by the developers.

Which is why people should continue to suggest it; the players want that level of control. Modifying the current lock in place isn't as crazy and asking for a system to be put in place.

In any case, to end the derailment of the topic. Again, I agree for the most part that players should be free to spend their FP where they want. My exception is when it comes to finishing the GB's level. Owners should be given more control over that.

 

[DeletedUser]

To be honest this is not likely to happen. The amount of effort and code isn't justified in relation to the small impact it would have on the game, and the small percentage of players that would ever use it.

 

[DeletedUser]

Which is why people should continue to suggest it; the players want that level of control. Modifying the current lock in place isn't as crazy and asking for a system to be put in place.

In any case, to end the derailment of the topic. Again, I agree for the most part that players should be free to spend their FP where they want. My exception is when it comes to finishing the GB's level. Owners should be given more control over that.

I, as a player, do not want this. I use means that are given already. Math of GBs is easy if you have you calculator with you. No space to leave for snipers and making it really not profitable to end level of GB - I learn that. You should learn too, not complain and ask on and on and on as a child.

 

[ebs the drunk]

I, as a player, do not want this. I use means that are given already. Math of GBs is easy if you have you calculator with you. No space to leave for snipers and making it really not profitable to end level of GB - I learn that. You should learn too, not complain and ask on and on and on as a child.

I wasn't complaining about snipers. In fact I've said twice I don't care about them. I've said several times now, I'm talking about the last fp as an owner. Math and calculators has next to nothing to do with that.

I don't care about the snipers or who gets what place, but preventing players from leveling my buildings is a control that makes sense.

as for who invests and who gets what place, I agree with you, that should be fair game. But I only want control, as an owner, over who completes the level.

 

[Nabucodonosor]

To clarify a few things regarding right and wrong:

Obviosly, it is morally wrong to steal Tiraje's FPs. Yet, the game allows for it. Does the game need more rules? Why would it? Life itself, nature allows for theft. You can go out, and nick the wallet out of the pocket of the next best stranger. -- But there are consequences. Even if you are not caught and killed, beaten or sued, and thus judged by men and their law (if you are lucky), natural law, God, karma, whatever you wanna call it, will have balance.

Shall we infringe the right to freedom of choice for all to stop a thieving minority at one specific street corner in a manner of speaking? -- I say no.

Does it make it okay to "snipe", rip off and steal what is not freely given because the game rules and programming allows for it? -- Of course not! It will always constitute theft, even if men's law does not recognize it, and it is morally wrong, AND it WILL have consequences in accordance to nature's measure which cannot be escaped by hiding behind a computer monitor, Firewall & VPN: If you cheat, you will be cheated on. And if you own all of FoE, your girlfriend will find a way. *G*

 

[Emberguard]

tricking people into placing fps into their GBs and then disconnecting when sniping properly arranged is a strategy???
NO! This is cheating!!!

Unless they told you it was free to place then there was no trickery
Unless you've talked to them you don't know if they saw your contributions at the time of disconnect or if your contributions caused it.

No.

• No player (GB Owner) should be allowed to forbid or prevent me to invest in his/her building, and risk my FPs to secure a top wining spot if the game has given me the right to do so (by placing me as a neighbor, or while being a friend or guildmate).
• No player (GB Owner) has the right to telling me what I do or not with my FPs. That would mean that another player (GB Owner) be controlling what I do with my account.

This is the main reason I'd go with a proposal that if a GB is disconnected players can still contribute but no bonuses would be received from the GB.

However given tavern boosts allow a player to prevent plundering through not being attacked for the length of the boost it's only fair that a disconnect allows owners to not have any contributions into their GB

 

[DeletedUser5882]

Does the game need more rules? Why would it? Life itself, nature allows for theft.

Life sucks so I was just hoping we could have utopia in a virtual environment But it seems since it is human made, it will still have flaws.

Unless they told you it was free to place then there was no trickery

99% of the players do not discuss or even reply for a question "is it okay to place fps?"
The ones who care about that have profile messages about it.
I have had disconnection problem before (twice) but in those cases the GB owner was right because I had not paid attention to their 1.9 contributions in prev levels though no such profile note existed. So most of the time looking for being allowed is not a practical thing. It may take over 1 day to receive such a reply and by that time the spot in question would be gone!

I see that some people don't read the original post in this thread. This GB had reached level 69 with only snipings! Not a single sign about a deal going on whether swap or 50% placement. Always different names on different levels (some names same but got different spot in different levels). It was raised with "snipings" if you like that term here!

I was not "caught pants down" as one of the comments say because I was not raping someone's GB ) I could have completed my fps within seconds using mobile. But finding contribution for a level 70 Arc is a difficult thing for most players! I saw he leveled and saw I would risk over 2K fps being kept for a long time but still decided to help. I placed slowly with PC. The GB owner knew he could rip off 1K from me and disconnected at the right moment where I basically had placed all self fps he would have placed in normal circumstances! His Arc p1 is occupied by the same player who he had me sniped with (guildie). For 2 days now they have the GB open waiting for their p2 to be "sniped"!! Does this player look like he had some deals or his GB had been violated?

Maybe modify the Ignore List function to include that an Ignored Player cannot invest in the Ignoring Player GBs.

That sounds like something applicable! It won't help the GBs from getting sniped if you don't want it happen but it could be a good measure for certain players who show no regard for kind warnings!

Disconnecting a GB hurts the GB Owner more than the sniper.

True, only if the GB owner has investments they care for!

I would like to prevent players from leveling the GB (taking the last fp) without disconnecting the building.

This is one thing I agree with mostly as a perp! I do that usually by accident!
Maybe an option like "show unattached units" or "ask for confirmation when spending diamonds" could be added in settings.
That would work for all GBs at the same time and not selected ones. An option that allows maximum placement by -1?

 

[Emberguard]

I was not "caught pants down" as one of the comments say because I was not raping someone's GB

Oh, that's what they meant. That's the most ridiculous analogy for a GB, it's not possible to abuse it merely through contributing to it. Disconnecting a GB to stop contributions is much closer to abuse

[...]This GB had reached level 69 with only snipings! Not a single sign about a deal going on whether swap or 50% placement. Always different names on different levels (some names same but got different spot in different levels). It was raised with "snipings" if you like that term here!
[...] The GB owner [...] disconnected at the right moment where I basically had placed all self fps he would have placed in normal circumstances! His Arc p1 is occupied by the same player who he had me sniped with (guildie). For 2 days now they have the GB open waiting for their p2 to be "sniped"!! Does this player look like he had some deals or his GB had been violated?[...]

Given you said some of them were on other lvls as well, either scenario could be possible. If they sell goods at all then that could effect who he wants lvl'ing his arc as well. It's possible you're right, but it's also possible they really did have a deal.

 

[DeletedUser5882]

It's possible you're right

Of course this will be a "he said she said" situation from where you look at it but whether GB owner is right or the investor is matters not. Current features allows an investor to be ripped off massively by the GB owner. GB owner can protect their GBs by not unlocking next level or disconnecting. But the moment investor starts placing fps, there is no way for them to protect their fps unless they managed to lock themselves in. And this requires a new feature! Not something that puts the GB owner in a difficult position but one that does not allows the GB owner to perform such scams either.
However I am well aware of the likelihood of this happening to be very low. All I can do is to open it to suggestions and comments and hope for a magical solution to be proposed
But the upside is, I saw some different good suggestions that could be applicable for other situations and for me even that is a good progress!

 

[Dan 49 the fearless]

Of course this will be a "he said she said" situation from where you look at it but whether GB owner is right or the investor is matters not. Current features allows an investor to be ripped off massively by the GB owner. GB owner can protect their GBs by not unlocking next level or disconnecting. But the moment investor starts placing fps, there is no way for them to protect their fps unless they managed to lock themselves in. And this requires a new feature! Not something that puts the GB owner in a difficult position but one that does not allows the GB owner to perform such scams either.
However I am well aware of the likelihood of this happening to be very low. All I can do is to open it to suggestions and comments and hope for a magical solution to be proposed
But the upside is, I saw some different good suggestions that could be applicable for other situations and for me even that is a good progress!

I would recommend you find other people who have high level arcs and make a 1.9 thread that way you will be able to post your own buildings and give to people who want you to give to them.

 

[kleopatra911]

I just had the nastiest GB disconnecting incident!

I decided to go for his p1.

EDIT: NormaJeane - 2018-12-14 - removed player names.​

(bolding by me)

not going to read all of this thread - so could well be somebody already mentioned it: If you didn't contact the owner and you both agreed on your going in, it's definitely your own fault (your decision without consent). If on the other hand, you both agreed that you go for p1/p2, then the owner didn't hold his side of the deal - learn to not trust that particular player.

 

[DeletedUser5882]

I would recommend you find other people who have high level arcs and make a 1.9 thread that way you will be able to post your own buildings and give to people who want you to give to them.

Thanks for the suggestion Dan I already have such a group.
The issue here is that Arc is for boosting the return. Not to steal from others. This feature naturally increased the investments to other GBs.
Of course there are those who do not want contributions from outsiders but the vast majority in fact depends on the investments of high level Arc owners. They receive investments that they could not afford as swap.
The bonus is that as GB owner owes nothing to that person who have invested in your GB because Arc makes sure the investment returns intact along with some bonus. Also, 2-3K fps are filled in instantly which is a very difficult sum to collect. And this immediate investment speeds up the GB.

not going to read all of this thread

I wish you had

If you didn't contact the owner

The owner had his GB up to level 70s with the investments from random high level Arc owners like me!
So this guy had no deals going on! Anyone who took p1/2 had placed maximum 50%.
Another fact I did not share is that this guy sent me a pm a day after claiming I was profiting and should have placed 1.9! So in a way, he had become envious after a time and took sort of an envy revenge from me for the profits I never got from him!

Also, I find it strange that some people here think that it is okay to rip off 1K from an investor only because they did not have official permission to invest!
I always try to reimburse whoever loses fps in my GBs. because anything above 1.9 is supposed to be my cost. And my taking advantage of those fps is equal to abusing my power over my GB!

However, the issue here is whether the GB owner should have such power to rip off as many as 1K fps by simply trapping the investor. Because the truth is he can!

It is something that the game allows!

I did something in return for their actions! I saw that this player had his CDM close to leveling as well as some profit in return. I leveld his CDM and also got back some profit!

Did the game allow me such action? Yes!
Is it morally correct to do so? No!
Is it technically a "strategy" according to the game? Unfortunately yes!

Both of these actions are allowed features and I 100% agree that both are wrong!

So the features allowing these should be changed.

- Donations should NOT be done by clicking 10 by 10 but by typing in the exact amount to donate like we do in trade offers (I believe there was a similar suggestion but my I couldn't find the thread it was mentioned in)
- GBs should have a -1 lock feature in settings. This would prevent even the GB owner to place the last fp unless it is disabled. (I imagined this to be similar to animation feature where reload could be necessary)

Edit:

I can not remember seeing the ability to view other players profile posts there.

I figured out how to see profile messages on mobile!
It is unfortunately not very practical.
You need to visit the player city and there tap on the city name.

 

[RedRed]

The issue here is that Arc is for boosting the return. Not to steal from others.

Arc is to boost the return, period. Everyone can choose out to do it in the optimal way for his playstyle, but any method has benefits and downsides (and should have), the point is to learn how to handle the downsides. Theft or gain is simply the difference between what you expected and what you get, and whatever is the result one of the parts involved might perceive its result as one of the two.

The solution to owner disconnection is simple and has been discussed here and in other forums, and is the one-click donation by choosing the total amount before donating . Obviously there is a downside, you might be burned more easily both on your own as well as other GBs (but you are safe in the 1/10000th case where the GB owner is smart enough to disconnect his GBs while your are taking a place without agreement )