Option setting to decline receiving goods from a lower TS player

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

    Hi,

    You can find new board on address: https://forum.ikariam.gameforge.com/
    Please register there to continue with usage.

    Old forum is in read only mode and will stay like that for some time

    Ikariam team

    • Option setting to decline receiving goods from a lower TS player

      As it stands right now, both the higher TS player and the lower TS player are punished if the lower TS player violates the "Pushing" rule and the higher TS player doesn't return some reasonable trade within a given amount of time.

      The suggestion I am proposing here is to create an option to disable receiving goods from a lower TS player at the discretion of the higher TS player. The purpose is to prevent inadvertent rule violations and to prevent abuse to higher TS players.

      Since this would be an option, the higher TS player would always have the choice to deactivate the option if she chose to receive goods from a lower TS player.

      This option, even when activated to prevent receiving goods from a lower TS player, would not impact trades conducted through the Trading Post.

      Functionally, this option, if activated, would either prevent the lower TS player from initiating the "Transport Goods" or allow the lower TS player to send the goods but block the goods upon arrival at the higher TS player's port.

      Graphically, this option could be added along side the current three player-preference choices on the "Game Options" tab (animations, confirm military withdrawal, Ambrosia security question).


      Reasons:

      1) There are many legitimate reasons a higher TS player might not even know goods have been pushed to her. The player who logs in just a few minutes each day, for example, may have 15 to 20 or more notices with the Town Advisor and not see that some uninvited goods were received. The player who logs in once per week, for example, might have missed the allowed time to return goods because the time limit to return the goods started and expired while she was offline.

      2) Even if the higher TS player does see that goods have been pushed to her, returning unsolicited goods takes away from the enjoyment of the game because of the time it takes to ship goods back to the offending player or to a GO town.

      3) Enforcing the Pushing rule in these situations alienates the rule-abiding players who did nothing wrong but not notice that someone else pushed them.

      4) Especially now with legal multi-accounts, a devious player can create a small account for the purpose of pushing a larger player with the intent of harassing the larger player or getting the larger player banned. The small account is disposable while the large account is punished. I have a friend who was in fact harrassed (pre-multi) in this fashion by a small player who pushed goods and then got himself banned to make it impossible for my friend to return the goods. This problem has always existed, but now is more available with the existence of legal multis.
    • 4) Especially now with legal multi-accounts, a devious player can create a small account for the purpose of pushing a larger player with the intent of harassing the larger player or getting the larger player banned. The small account is disposable while the large account is punished. I have a friend who was in fact harrassed (pre-multi) in this fashion by a small player who pushed goods and then got himself banned to make it impossible for my friend to return the goods. This problem has always existed, but now is more available with the existence of legal multis.
      Well, usually GO's use warning system and don't ban immediately for pushing (at least it should be so, also here).
      Also - how many pushing cases do we have here to implement such feature? Wouldn't it just make new misunderstandings? What will happen with players who have very simlart TS (less than 10% difference) and which can easily changed?
      "The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits."
      (c) Albert Einstein
    • Draxo wrote:

      Well, usually GO's use warning system and don't ban immediately for pushing (at least it should be so, also here).
      Also - how many pushing cases do we have here to implement such feature? Wouldn't it just make new misunderstandings? What will happen with players who have very simlart TS (less than 10% difference) and which can easily changed?


      From the recent experience of some of my alliance mates, this is simply not the case. And these were rule-abiding players who are well known and respected in the Ikariam community, both in the game and on the boards. I mention this just to illustrate that in my experience, the GOs apply the rule uniformly and ban on the first offense.

      I would suggest that players very close in TS would benefit the most from this feature. They could each opt to turn on the feature to prevent receiving goods from the lower TS player, and they would both be protected from inadvertent pushing if their scores alternate back and forth.

      As an aside, I put this suggestion forward a while ago and it has taken a bit to get posted. During this time, I personally experienced a lower TS player accidentally sending me goods. Fortunately for both of us, he noticed his mistake and messaged me about it (he was intending to send to a lower TS alliance mate of his). The amount of goods was small and our towns were close, so it was no problem to send goods back, but I would NEVER have noticed this in my log if he had not brought it to my attention.

      Please keep the comments coming!
    • This is a great suggestion. There are entirely too many people who don't know the pushing rules. And when those players are your neighbors, it is frustrating. Years ago I pummeled a tiny player practically out of the game because he kept sending me stuff which I then had to turn around and send back. No amount of messages got through to him. But pillaging his town dry with only one attack got him to stop. Unfortunately he stopped playing, too. :(

      I have also witnessed what happens when someone accidentally transports stuff to the wrong player. If it's a higher scored player and neither notices, they both get in trouble. And I've seen this multiple times. Having this option available would solve a lot.

      sig by Checkmate

      I dug my key into the side
      Of his pretty little souped-up four-wheel drive,
      Carved my name into his leather seats...
      I took a Louisville slugger to both headlights,
      Slashed a hole in all four tires...
      Maybe next time he'll think before he cheats

      The post was edited 1 time, last by JuneBarcarolle ().

    • I think this is a good idea, but I think you should also have the option of blocking goods from a certain person too. There used to be some people, I don't know if this happens anymore, who will pillage a random low level player dry, then send the goods to someone else, usually of a lower level, to avoid complaints. I know it's never been against the rules per se, but I have known people who got banned for pillaging someone much lower than them (harrassment), and they were able to avoid that because they didn't have the goods they pillaged. I also think there should be some option, or slight change of rules, to allow transport to someone of a slightly higher level than you. A couple years ago, I didn't get banned, but I got a warning for pushing, though I was a higher level when I sent the goods, when they arrived I was lower.
      Kill one man, and you are a murderer. Kill thousands of men, and you are a conqueror. Kill millions of men and you are a hero. Kill them all, and you are a god.
    • Since I know several players who use such features just for trolling others (e.g. - removing offer from trading post just before another one arrives) I doublt if this won't happen also with this.

      Also here I'll ask the same question as in .org: how often do happen pushing in your servers? Once a day, week, month? I doubt if it really worth that, if only administration here doesn't ban for one sent resurce unit (I know that in .org is always used warning system - GO writes warning to both players, no matter of amount and they get banned only if they ignore it).
      "The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits."
      (c) Albert Einstein
    • Honestly can't see this going through or the 'need' for this. Although it is a nuisance when /if it happens, think I've only seen it happen to one of my accounts three times across all the communities, it's not like it happens often enough for it to be a necessity. Adding a button just for the unlikely event is an annoyance, and it makes me question what happens with the already dead trading. Does this just die put because of this feature? To me it's just another pointless feature that is an overreactionfrom the players. CCan't give it anything higher than a 2, and that being generous


      Sig by June 8)
      Love is like air, without it... I die.

      spaPOT wrote:

      no worriess..you see im a kid thats why im dumb..kuku :pillepalle:
    • It's something that's been missing in the game for years. I've seen accounts disappear because of pushing. Moreover, pushing is very easy to abuse during wartime.

      I have a bad feeling however that something like this will never make it to the game since it doesn't earn any money to GF. Well, unless they make it an Ambrosia fed feature.

      rebirth | immortality | renewal
      current world: alpha (merged from eta) | previous worlds: my, ny, xi
    • bamcbix wrote:

      Frankly that's not why it won't make it, it won't make it because it limits player interaction.


      Agreed.. the proposal is too sweeping IMO. The only incidents of pushing that I have experienced have come from the scoundrels who try to get you banned during wars. I kind of like finding out who they are.

      Would a pop up warning explaining that you are about to push goods to a higher level player do? That way the player is both informed of the pushing rule and has to deliberately click a button to perform the transport.
    • it won't make it because it limits player interaction.
      Exactly.
      Would a pop up warning explaining that you are about to push goods to a higher level player do?
      If players are not able to read more important stuff in game I doubt if this will help. But better than restriction for sure.
      "The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits."
      (c) Albert Einstein
    • bamcbix wrote:

      it won't make it because it limits player interaction.

      This is a false claim. This is like saying the ability to ignore unwanted messages from other players limits player interaction. No player should have to tolerate unwanted messages, and no player should get banned due to the actions of another.

      As described in the OP, this feature would simply give each of us the OPTION to not allow receiving goods from a smaller TS player in order to not get pushed against your choice. If you are not worried about this issue, you can leave the option off. If you select the feature and later decide you want to allow a trade, you simply turn the option off.

      Getting banned for getting pushed much more severely limits player interaction than this feature ever could. This feature simply allows players to control their own account against the illegal actions of others.
    • Great idea Kryo!

      I got a 3 day ban once for sending goods to the wrong city and so did my friend even though he had no idea I sent him those goods. There was NO warning what so ever! This has to change because lag often changes the city you are trying to send goods to or raid.

      If they don't put an option in the options menu, they should at least send a message to both players like they do when gold account is about to expire.

      Sorry for sending you goods by accident! But at least you logged in on time to see my message and returned them before we got banned. PLUS it gave you this great idea! lol

      Cheers!
    • That's hardly the same thing, kryo, if you don't want goods from this specific player, I'd say that is a tad different than I do not want smaller players interacting with me period. Sure, you don't, I don't, but I'd be more fine if it was player specific, instead of a lock down play you can do. "I don't want to be verbally harassed" and "I don't want to take the effort to send your goods back, so I don't"(yes, it's usually other options, but honestly, that's besides the point for both) not exactly on the same level imo

      also, it makes me question if goods are already on the way when you select this option, what happens? If it's anything other than they arrive and you have to deal with them normally, I'm against it.


      Sig by June 8)
      Love is like air, without it... I die.

      spaPOT wrote:

      no worriess..you see im a kid thats why im dumb..kuku :pillepalle: