Capitulation

[allanon]

Would it be possible/beneficial for the player being capitulated on to receive something from the player who is capitulating? I know there is a penalty (10% military points) to the player who capitulated but I think it would be better if the other player also received a reward for forcing the capitulation. maybe the player who got capitulated on could receive 1% of the production like a tax? and the tax could increase every time the player gets capitulated on again?

example: player a capitulates to player b the first time, player b receives 1% of player a's production
             after one week, player a capitulated again to player b, player b now receives 2% of player a's production
             after another week, player a capitulates to player c, player c now receives 1% of player a's production, etc.

this way, the economy types will also receive a bit of a penalty for capitulating since the 10% military points doesn't really mean anything to them.

of course, you'd have to figure out some way of checking for abuse too, but it might actually make it easier to catch multi-accounters as well

thanks all.

[guimassaro]

It's a really nice idea, but I think it'd be too hard to program that. Even the Bank boost isn't effective (each level should give 1% earning under the gold you have, but is inactive), if the game have to calculate percentages of incomes from another players... I think it'll mess all up...

[oldman67]

Lots of time we discuss about capitulation system. Now, capitulation ruining the game and it is abused from many players who want to avoid fight. Previous rules about capitulation was abandoned because some players used capitulation to rise someones military rank.
Best solution, by my opinion, is to decrease production by 10% of player who capitulated. 10 % per capitulation, and if someone capitulate 3 times in same week, his production will fall by 30 %. Also, number of capitulation should be limited, lets say on 3 capitulation per era. On this way, we will not have players with white flag whole era...

[allanon]

yes, that's sort of what i meant though 10% is a huge penalty. i think you can only capitulate once a week though so he'll lose max 10% in your example.

oh well, i don't know what is doable and what is not. i imagine it might be quite difficult to program a continuing tax but maybe a 1 time penalty of 1% of whole week production at current rates? or something like that.

Lots of time we discuss about capitulation system. Now, capitulation ruining the game and it is abused from many players who want to avoid fight. Previous rules about capitulation was abandoned because some players used capitulation to rise someones military rank.
Best solution, by my opinion, is to decrease production by 10% of player who capitulated. 10 % per capitulation, and if someone capitulate 3 times in same week, his production will fall by 30 %. Also, number of capitulation should be limited, lets say on 3 capitulation per era. On this way, we will not have players with white flag whole era...

[oldman67]

It will not be so hard to make 10% penalty in production. Only its matter could server handle with few more calculations... And we will not have so much capitulation with that rule and with limited numbers of capitulation.

If that is too much job, I could suggest another option   Player who capitulate could lost his last province with all villagers and army there and player with only one province will not be able to capitulate at all   Player who capitulate will lost all networth points from that last province and on that way we will have more reality   Every capitulation must be big damage for player who capitulate...

Only, player who pushed someone to capitulate will not got nothing. Any idea, any rule about that will be abused

[ShadowStorm]

There are just people who like developing but dislike fighting. There's no reason we should further spoil their fun of the game.

[oldman67]

Too many rules are changed into advantage of players who "dislike fighting" and we will soon have only Farmeria Online here. In last 12 month I dont remember any good new rule for fighters. All changes, from capitulation to escort for trebuchets are good for defenders and attackers will soon pay tax for every attack...

[Radooo]

The attacks in x10 were introduced about 8 months ago and I consider it is good for fighters

[Polymeron]

Actually, I was going to suggest this myself as I think this would spice up rivalries... But then I heard that once upon a time, capitulation gave benefits to the one capitulated from. That rule was therefore abused by multiaccounters, and it was impossible to track down that sort of cheating. So much for that notion... I prefer it as it is without an opening for cheaters...

[guimassaro]

Too many rules are changed into advantage of players who "dislike fighting" and we will soon have only Farmeria Online here. In last 12 month I dont remember any good new rule for fighters. All changes, from capitulation to escort for trebuchets are good for defenders and attackers will soon pay tax for every attack...

Acttualy, atacker pay taxes to atack. The upkeep when the army is around was 3x the regular upkeep, and since the fresh start of Realm 5, the atacking upkeep is 1,5x the normal... Isn't it a new good rule for the atackers???
The centralization's prices where substacially incrased, so it takes a lot more time to have one walled province... Is it good for the defenders?
All the new rules are trying to make the game more competitive. Maybe they look bad, at firts, coz you are not used to it. But if you keep playing you'll see they are for the best...

[oldman67]

OK, I will admit that I made mistake... I am not playing on Realm 5, but that 1.5 upkeep is only good new rule for attackers. Centralization price is same for all players and we don't need to talk about that. 10x targets are attacked from farmers too. 1000 cheap spearmans could bring them lots of money. Personally, I dont like that 10x targets. Any player with army will attack 10x target before than some farmer neighbor. With 10x we got lots of battles without real battles between live accounts. Before 10x I was able to make about 150 attacks per era, now I could make 1500 attacks but that is not the same feeling.
Whats with other rules on R5 ? What about no online time ? Most of players there will build big fort, big border and sit and wait for someone to attack them. No online time is much bigger advantage for defenders than that 1.5 upkeep for attackers.

And all old rules about capitulation, escort for trebuchets, Forts capacity are changed into advantage for defenders. Cos of that we have in some Realms 80 % farmers. No one could explain to me that is interesting sit and count villagers for 3 months... Its easy but its not interesting... Rules just put that kind of players in good position, and most of players starting to play in that farming style.
More attacks, more battles and this game will be more interesting.

[guimassaro]

That's your opinion, and I respect... but there is a lot of players that don't have enough time to keep both eyes on the game all day long. I work and study and have a girlfriend, so you can imagine how many time I have to play this (and others) game. It's a little anoying those player who build an army quickly and keep atacking all my provinces, everyday... This rules are best to protection, I must admit, but as you are telling, most players are farmers. So, the rules are good for the majority... Democracy.. hehehe

[oldman67]

There is only one question: why is someone who play 18 hours per day in worst position than someone who play 2-3 hours per day ?
But, we are talking about capitulation here and capitulation is now abused by many players. Some players capitulated after first spy, without any fight... That should be changed and must be closer to reality. Everyone who capitulated through history was in bad position, only in Imperia we have situation that capitulation is good thing.

[oldman67]

I have some temporary solution what could be doned fast    Text on that capitulate button must be changed into "protect", that will be much closer to truth.

[gugah]

I have an idea that perhaps dont mess up the programers. Why dont use a capitulation like a bank loan.
Say for example  player 1 capitulate from player 2. Then force player 1 to take a loan (1 for exemple) and give that money to player 2. Then player 2 gets his tribute and player 1 stays paying the loan like a normal one.
I  think maybe it works. I leave the situation where player 1 has already paying a loan to programers