Just a thought, but for the alliance server at least, what if you didn't get ghost acres when you hit within your alliance. Obviously this depends on whether the admins see internal land-farming as an abuse of the ghost acres or not.

This way, if an alliances want to two-step on their retals, it doesn't look poor for getting double ghost acres. Additionally, for alliances who farm a player that has quit, they can keep that player's land within the alliance, but no bonus acres. This would prevent a future where alliances only internally farm or all-x and don't truly interact with each other. Perhaps an alliance would try to split into two alliances to trade or two alliances might agree to land-trade, but at least then the politics are involved and the community can decide how they want to deal with it.

no matter if there aren't ghosts on intertag grabbing or there are, intertag farming will happen.

If you don't like it, why not interact with each other on your own? You aren't prohibited from interacting with each other. You're trying to address a problem that isn't there.

@marshal: Farming your own alliance mates gains over 2x more land with ghost acres. That's like saying people are going to steal so why bother locking anything up (perhaps a poor analogy, but hopefully you get the idea).


@rockman: I guess I don't agree with you that a problem is not there. To be fair, I did state that it depends on whether one (specifically the admins) sees this as a problem.

In response though, I'd say most alliances do interact with each other (only RD really did intra-clan land-trading) but it's been mentioned by several that if RD does not see any negative consequences from it, then they will do it in the future. Here, some alliance could step in and war them over it, but given that the ratio of warring:netting alliances is about 2:3, the netting alliances already will need to war about every other set, and if they war over this ideal (likely for multiple sets), then they'll be in a worse position than they started.

Obviously, getting ghost acres from your clan with low-def and then putting themselves into DR is going to gain more land at less cost than hitting other alliances with def and possibly harsh retals. So, it would seem that if there are no negatives, and you gain more land, alliances will switch to this form of netting. There are a myriad of reasons (mostly based on how this negatively affects competition) that some players would not like this. There are of course positives for this sort of play.

So the idea is if the admins do indeed want to curb intra-clan land trading or feel that this is not the intended effect of ghost acres, then this is one simple solution.

If they (or you) do not see it as a problem, then trivially there is no problem to address.

inter-clan farming is bs in my book any way it goes, rather its used to recover lost land or not, still bull fluff

My question. How is inter clan farming different to buyouts and FA chains?

Answer that and then you can probably get inter clan farming stopepd.

(I run all explores, so it doesnt effect me, just saying that its the same as what is already being done)

i demand to receive at least 1/2 of the ghost acres created in an attack against my country. or i'm going to tell y'all to fluff the heck off.

@drinks: I'd say that buyout and FA chains are a part of the game, and there's a reason that some are asking for more transparency in them so that people can easily know who did what. However, it would be difficult to set about a significant change in the game that would remove those options without hindering the game play.

I believe that ghost acres were only added to encourage interaction between players (and for the alliance server, I'd argue alliances) so that land-grabbing is more competitive than all explore. If you agree that this was the reason for re-introducing ghost acres, then it seems a fairly logical step to say that the way they reward intra-clan farming is exactly the opposite of their intended effect, and so this is a suggestion that allows one to keep the original intended bonus and remove the undesired effect.